Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Watching Petraeus and Crocker deftly fight off defiance and ignorance from Congressional Democrats reminds me —

— it’s time to give my son a fruit roll up, then change him and put him down for his nappy!

****
update: Today’s left: when all else fails, break out the gay baiting!*

****
update 2: Petraeus and Crocker both say that the draft they saw of the White House Petraeus report (mandated by a Democrat-led Congress, remember — a point General Petraeus himself noted) is in no way substantively different from their collaborative effort to inform that report.

Or, in other words, the “Bush Report” will be the “Petraeus-Crocker Report” — and it will remain so, no matter how big an ad MoveOn.org purchases to claim otherwise.

To argue anything else now is to suggest that both Petraeus and Crocker are lying, and that they are doing so at the expense of the lives of our troops. Which is a rather bold assertion to make.

Period. End of discussion.

****
Ace has more.

88 Replies to “Watching Petraeus and Crocker deftly fight off defiance and ignorance from Congressional Democrats reminds me —”

  1. Tman says:

    Your son would probably show more maturity towards Petraeus than these idiots in congress. I look at this guy Lantos and wonder, what exactly is the requirements for being a senator? A Pulse? Anything else?

    Lantos looks to fail on that requirement by the way.

  2. PCachu says:

    It’s no wonder they had to drum Lieberman out of the party. His demonstrable maturity made the rest of them feel … inadequate.

  3. The_Real_JeffS says:

    Ah, but Tom Lantos holds the “high moral ground“, Tman. Congressional qualifications (or disqualifications) are thusly immaterial.

    I must admit, Lantos has an impressive record. But there comes a time when one begins to undermine their high moral ground by refusing to recognize possible error. Or is using that high moral ground to cover up the sewage deposited by fellow party members.

  4. Tman says:

    Thanks for the link to Santo’s bio RJS. It amazes me that someone who has a bio that is so amazingly pro-liberation and anti-fascist that he would be so defeatist towards Iraq. It further reinforces my “no pulse” judgement.

  5. kelly says:

    There simply isn’t moral ground high enough to rise above the sewage from the rest of Lantos’ party. It laps at his feet right now. I hope he and the rest of these jerks drown in it, frankly.

  6. Cowboy says:

    JeffS:

    But there comes a time when one begins to undermine their high moral ground by refusing to recognize possible error.

    Let’s all say it at once, JACK MURTHA!

  7. Slartibartfast says:

    Ken Layne went off the deep end a few years back, and still hasn’t come up.

  8. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    – Even without the moveon ad, this is shaping up to be a veritable political bloodbath visited on the heads of the Dems. A quagmire. Another VietNam. Even Coulter is having a hard time finding enough adjectives for “traitors”.

  9. Rick Smith says:

    Petraeus is showing an overall grasp of the situation in Iraq that is over the heads of these congressmen and women. His intelligence is clearly superior to these people and should give us hope for the future in this conflict. The career path for political leadership in our country needs to have room for men such as David Patraeus.

  10. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    – The Dems are into the “sadlings” territory now, trumping up hysterical hypotheticals. They’ve decided to move entirely away from facts based arguments. Current conspiracy ploy:

    “General, would you give us your unfettered ORIGINAL report, before its been edited by the white House.”

    – Well of course. Did you think they’d skip even a single page of the Marxist manual?

  11. mojo says:

    “Let’s be clear on one important point, Senator Lantos – I DON’T WORK FOR YOU. I work for the President and the American people. You say you won’t believe anything I say, well, that’s your privilege. But there’s only so much smarmy lip I’m going to take on this matter. I can always leave, unless you want to try on the ‘contempt of congress’ routine again. I note, however, that it didn’t work out too well the last time.”

    Ah, fantasies…

  12. B Moe says:

    “It amazes me that someone who has a bio that is so amazingly pro-liberation and anti-fascist that he would be so defeatist towards Iraq.”

    Perhaps he is doing penance:

    “Lantos was a strong supporter of the 1991 Persian Gulf War. During the run-up to the war, Lantos used his Congressional Human Rights Caucus to host a well-spoken young Kuwaiti woman identified only as “Nurse Nayirah”, who told of horrific abuses by Iraqi soldiers, including the killing of Kuwaiti babies by taking them out of their incubators and leaving them to die on the cold floor of the hospital. These alleged atrocities figured prominently in the rhetoric at the time about Iraqi abuses in Kuwait. This story later proved to be a complete fabrication. “Nurse Nariyah” was, in fact the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States, and had been coached on this story by the PR firm of Hill & Knowlton, who were paid $14 million by representatives of the Government of Kuwait to create a PR campaign to generate U.S. support for an invasion. Hill & Knowlton also provided free office space to the Congressional Human Rights Foundation (distinct from the similarly named caucus), of which Lantos was co-chair at the time.”

  13. Squid says:

    I tried to read that Wonkette thingie, but I couldn’t understand what they were saying. So I tried to read it again, and it made even less sense. I was halfway through my third reading when I realized that it was actively making me stupider!

    I’m sure I’d have realized sooner, but, you know, the stupid.

  14. Ric Locke says:

    Rick Smith, mojo: Yeah. Second Coming of D. Eisenhower.

    If Petraeus were to simply look one of those guys in the eye and say “That’s a lie, Senator” just once while on network TV, he could get the Republican nomination by acclamation and be elected in a landslide.

    Regards,
    Ric

  15. clarice says:

    Lantos and Wexler–a shonda. There’s no other way to describe their behavior today except disgusting.

  16. Eric says:

    This whole thing with Petraeus reminds me of the Ollie North hearings. There was no new information – they hasd already held secret hearings to figure out what they wanted to know. The public hearings were just about embarrassing the president by taking down some no-name colonel.

    And he handed them their asses.

    The situation here is very different, but I’ll chalk this up to yet more of the left’s ignorance of all things military. To wit – every officer over the rank of major (or equivalent) is first and formost a politician. Petraeus comes off better than they do because he’s better at this than they are.

    They should have stuck to Gonzo bashing.

  17. melparnell says:

    If Petraeus were to simply look one of those guys in the eye and say “That’s a lie, Senator” just once while on network TV, he could get the Republican nomination by acclamation and be elected in a landslide.

    Which many folks on the Left are pretty convinced he’d like to try for 2012

  18. tim maguire says:

    Squid: agreed. The only thing more impenetrable than that video is the essay that comes after it. But you get the gist–Petreaus isn’t demanding an immediate withdrawl, so…bad man! bad man! evil Bushie!

  19. psychologizer says:

    Who was this TV show for? Obviously not for Ric and mojo (who speak for many, it’s safe to say), or they’d have got their Jimmy Stewart scene.

    The other side got theirs.

  20. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    – Ok. the Dems are down to bedrock now, trotting out BBC/ABC polls. They’re about at the end of the rope they’ll be hanging themselves with in the days and weeks to come.

  21. B Moe says:

    Wonkette’s audience and commenters are the bottom of the barrel drooling morons of the left.

    They go there because they don’t like to be talked down to.

  22. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    – Ah. Shut ‘er down. the smell of burning Dem flesh was making it hard to see in the hairings chamber. Typical with this group of Democrats. Cut and run.

  23. Rusty says:

    #

    Comment by psychologizer on 9/10 @ 4:10 pm #

    Who was this TV show for? Obviously not for Ric and mojo (who speak for many, it’s safe to say), or they’d have got their Jimmy Stewart scene.

    The other side got theirs.

    It’s called a dog and pony show for a reason.

  24. Merovign says:

    Big Bang:

    Bedrock? Dude, their shovels are melting.

    Are there any sane dems left in power, or have they all been driven out by the “tiny minority of extremists?”

  25. Topsecretk9 says:

    this is pretty pathetic…

    http://action.openleft.com/page/petition/dc

  26. Mikey NTH says:

    “Are there any sane dems left in power, or have they all been driven out by the “tiny minority of extremists?.”

    They set themselves, publicly, in a position dictated to by their hard-left base, so anything that endangers that position has to be attacked. Rather than go through each factual support of Gen. Petraeus’ testimony and then challenging the conclusions they skip that and just attack. Which lets anyone with any lawyer training know they can’t challenge him on either the facts or his conclusions. The cliche has a point: “When the facts are on your side, hammer the facts; when the law is on your side, hammer the law; when neither are, hammer the table.”

  27. Major John says:

    “To wit – every officer over the rank of major (or equivalent) is first and formost a politician.”

    Um, no. For a view of LTCs, read http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NmZiYjIyNjQ1MmUxNzJiN2UyMGI5ZjU2MTk5YjdjNDY=

    It (politics)does start to happen to many a COL. And everyone BG and up has to be at least part “politician” or they cannot operate effectively. Strange things can happen when you pin stars on…

  28. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    this is pretty pathetic…

    – More like the signs of last gasp desperation. Everyone on scene are describing the Dems as “livid”, after their roasting today in the hearings. Love to be a fly on the wall, and listen to some of the screaming going back and forth between the moveon/Kos Kids ect., and the Democratic leadership right about now. Must be a sight to behold.

    – The Cal Senator holding up that NYT ad was simply devastating. Ending the hearings so abruptly probably indicates moderate Democrats had seen enough and pulled the plug in all out damage control.

  29. Merovign says:

    The “Bush’s report” meme will be as successfully promulgated among the left as the “stolen election” meme, because, frankly, you need that level of self-deception to hold that belief set.

    I mean, imagine how terrifying the world would be to a leftist who had to rely on demonstrated facts, in context, to prove their point? One shudders to think.

    Maybe that’s why they’re so cranky.

  30. Rick Ballard says:

    “Strange things can happen when you pin stars on…”

    That’s why it’s best to have five of ’em. This would never happen to anyone in the War Department of a Burge/Goldstein administration.

  31. Rick Smith says:

    Ric

    Eisenhower was seen as the savior/victor of WWII especially after the death of FDR, a position that was reinforced by a sense of defeat in Korea that was self-imposed by Truman with his relief of McArthur. Eisenhower was successful in arbiting the balance between the US and Britain due to the power of our industrial might, a devolpment that he later came to fear. He never had the advantage of the education and challenge to thinking that Prateus has had. Not many do. General officers in the service today are more educated than most college professors and have the advantage of serving a differnet master, that of the protection of our nation, not of their own ego. Having said that, all General officers need to be scutinized as all politicians are for ulterior motives. Remember Wes Clark.

  32. Drumwaster says:

    The Cal Senator holding up that NYT ad was simply devastating.

    Which Senator was that? So far, I have gotten a “no comment” from either of their offices (Boxer & Feinstein) regarding that very ad.

  33. Rick Smith says:

    Drumwaster-

    The hearings today were in the House, so no Senator was involved.

  34. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    – Sorry…Representative Drumwaster.

    – Out of ALL the prominent Dems, including the three major pres candidates, the Only one who has publicly condemned the moveon.org ad by press statements is, of all people, Nancy Pelosi. A first crack in the vote/love affair of the Dem core leadership with the far Left? Hard to say.

  35. Rick Smith says:

    Ric-

    Sorry. Didn’t make my point well in the above post. I agree with your sentiment, an honest man is an honest man, I don’t care where he comes from. In today’s political climate I tend to trust those that have given their lives to the defense of the country over those that have dedicated their lives to political power and the perks that go with it. The irony is in the stupidity and duplicity of those that chose the political path. I’m an Army brat and come from a family that has chosen to serve through several generations, so I’m biased. A bias I am particularly proud of.

  36. lee says:

    RE: comment #29

    LMAO

  37. Major John says:

    I thought Jeff said I would be an elventy-star Field Marshal in the Burge/Goldstein War Department?!!

  38. lee says:

    I had an interesting thought.

    What if the Iraqi military/security capabilities were sufficient six months ago?

    Iran better watch it…

  39. Mikey NTH says:

    Rick Smith: IIRC, Dwight Eisenhower was known in the army for being highly intelligent. He was a top grad of the Army War College. He was chief of staff for MacArthur when MacArthur was army chief of staff and did the same for MacArthur in the Phillippines. He was on Marshall’s short list of “officers to be promoted over many ahead of him on the list” when the chance came.

  40. Eric says:

    Major John,

    I originally wrote “starting at colonel”, but it didn’t come out right, so I changed it. But that’s what I was thinking. And maybe “politician” is a loaded word, so let’s use communicator? Motivator? The point is nobody gets to Patraeus’s position in the military without being able to play this game. He’s certainly given presentations to hostile audiences before, and he’s seen the sort of clumsy traps they’re setting.

    BTW, I’m not a huge fan of North. I was really talking more about the composure, the awareness of appearances, and the ability to think on one’s feet.

  41. The_Real_JeffS says:

    I tried to read that Wonkette thingie, but I couldn’t understand what they were saying.

    To understand anything Wonkette posts, you have to think in terms of “anal sex”, it being Wonkette is the go to blog for that area of interest.

  42. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    “Wonkette is the go to blog for that area of interest.”

    – Wall to wall assholes. That about covers it. I quit visiting the site years ago when she slipped out, not that she did very much of her own schtick anyway. But with the exiting of the head anal expert, it just didn’t have the old pucker.

  43. cynn says:

    … and the question that hangs in the air, like a paralyzed dragonfly, is what did you think of Petraus’ presentation? I think he comes across as authoritative and articulate. I don’t think he’s been compromised or coached; he’s too smart for it. What remains to be seen is whether or not his nebulous pronouncements play well with the folks on the ground. Poor guy’s in a tough spot.

  44. SteveG says:

    Hand a congressperson their ass, and they just put it on their heads and marvel at the view.

    I liked Obama’s take on the Moveon ad…. he sidesteps and says he doesn’t disagree with the General personally, he just disagrees with the General’s logic.
    OK
    So if someone accuses me of betraying my country and a guy says that… I’d hate him forever. Even a total weasel can come up with better… like “I wouldn’t say that about the General, although he and I do have multiple points of disagreement”… or did they already polish that one up and deliver it?

    I’ll lose all respect for Jim Webb if he doesn’t tell someone to STFU soon.
    The Democrats will lose the military

  45. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    – cynn – As much as I may like you as a person, if you have to ask how badly it went for the Dems today you’re to far into the Lefts “Wonder Sphere”(tm). Patty ate their lunch. If that wasn’t bad enough the crazy aunts in the closet spread mustard all over them before they even got to the dinner table. It was so bad someone in the Dem leadership yanked the plug to put this “bad day at the Dems black rock” out of its misery before any more damage was done.

  46. N. O'Brain says:

    “Poor guy’s in a tough spot.”

    He kicks Al Queda ass.

    He kicks Iranian terrorist ass.

    He kicks Democrats ass.

    Explain the difference.

  47. cynn says:

    For once in a blue moon, BB, ima hangin’ mah head. Sputtering bunch of ill-informed imbeciles. Poor Petraeus, and I like the man, must feel like some poor guy on camera in a subway rest stop (not a gay joke — meaning, he is totally in the klieg light of scrutiny). How the hell can anyone respond or react to Petraeus’ (previously leaked) recommendations as if this were new information?

    Still, questions abound, and if our own brave reps don’t ask them, we abide.

  48. guinsPen says:

    nebulous pronouncements

    Fuck you.

  49. ccoffer says:

    Lantos reminds me of the fact that there probably were some real pieces of shit who died in the Shoa just cuz of their religion. Its a shame Lantos was not among them. Such a shame that so many good and decent people perished while a maggot like Tom Lantos survived.

  50. Ric Locke says:

    #38 lee, why do you suppose the Iranians are spending so much time, money, and effort on Iran? They’re not only Shi’ia, they’re nutcase Shi’ia. Why have they been supporting Sunni Iraqis?

    I said it a year ago, and alphie laughed at me. I’m still not laughing.

    There has, historically, been no love lost whatever between Iran and Iraq. They fought a fairly bitter war to an inconclusive draw in the Eighties; it was partly to take attention off of that humiliation that Saddam invaded Kuwait. At that time, the Iraqi and Iranian armies were roughly equal in capability, the Iranian one a little better, the Iraqi a little bigger, result a wash. A couple of years later the Americans came through and made the Iraqis look like grade schoolers; Saddam rebuilt his army, calling in advisors to improve the standard — and the Americans came again, and this time the Iraqi army looked like sheep. If the Iranian Army is roughly equal to the Iraqi one, and the Iraqi Army isn’t good enough to get the Americans’ Humvees below 40 MPH, just how good is the Iranian Army, really? Things that make you go hmmm, especially if you’re an Iranian General or politician.

    The United States Army and Marines are working their butts off to teach the Iraqi Army how it’s done. I don’t think anybody expects them to get the whole shtick right away, but imagine yourself an Iranian facing an Iraqi Army that was, say, 20% as effective as their American teachers… And from what Major John and the others have been saying, the fraction’s probably more like 30%. Avoiding that is worth a lot in IED production and shipment, don’t you think? Maybe even worth gritting your teeth and giving aid and comfort to theological opponents?

    Regards,
    Ric

  51. cynn says:

    Just want to say that guinsPen’s astute rejoinder totally silences me forever and always. Plus, I had to go back and check the name spelling twice.

  52. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    Still, questions abound, and if our own brave reps don’t ask them, we abide.

    – cynn – If we have to watch one more ill-informed, or ideologically driven Democrat ask off the point inane questions, float hysterical hypotheticals, or grasp desperately for America hating overseas press polls, we are all going to collectively hurl.

    – Maybe if they’d stop trying to pretend they love the troops more than they love getting elected, or that have have a freekin clue on Iraq, aside from trying to pander to the far left by screeming “get out” they might have a tiny hope of rectitude.

    – As things stand, between the insane screaming from the Left CRUD-Pinkos, and the brilliant piece of journo hate speech demeaning our leading General, they just may have attended the final trainwreck for the cause today.

  53. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    – Sorry, close caps tag messed for some reason…..

  54. cynn says:

    Ric Locke: Sorry I went off on you before. Please oh, please don’t tell me the point is to equalize the Iranian and Iraqi forces. Because my head would explode, and I’ll find the best IED to set it off.

  55. Ric Locke says:

    cynn, I’ll hand you a Democrat-style unapology: I’m sorry you were offended by guinsPen’s remark. But I’ll tell you what — when we get to, say, a quarter of the level of spittle-drenched vitriol unleashed on those who question The Narrative™ on the typical lefty site, let us know and we’ll try to leash the dogs.

    As for “nebulosity”, Petraeus did make a mistake, the typical one expected from a person of that caliber: he overestimated the mental age of his audience. I’m sure he worked hard trying to keep it at the Junior High level without delivering obvious insults. It’s a little hard to blame him for not realizing he needed to get it down to “See Spot. See Spot run.”

    Regards,
    Ric

  56. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    Outside observer: “…Wait a second….what is that Representative saying?…..he’s calling your general a liar. Isn’t this man your leading military guy….didn’t the Congress almost unanimously approve him for the job?. didn’t he and the troops perform way beyond expectations. Why is that Representative attacking him, and accusing him of dishonesty?….Makes no sense…”

    Average Joe citizen: “….I’m not sure, but it looks like they’re not happy with what hes telling them. Seems like the more they try to make him seem untrustworthy, the more rediculous they look. weird. The Democrats seem to be really craanky….”

    Outside observer:“…Hmmmmm….and then you Americans wonder why the world thinks you’re all nuts….”

  57. Ric Locke says:

    No, cynn, the point isn’t to equalize the Iranian and Iraqi forces. If what we are trying can be made to work, the Iraqis can sneer at the Iranians — but that’s strictly a byproduct of what we are trying to teach.

    The sheiks of Anbar appear to have had an “Aha!” moment, coming to the realization that the Mooreonic Convergence is full of shit — the Americans do not want to steal their country or their oil, and if things can settle down in such a way as to not leave Saddam-like loose cannon scattered across the landscape we’ll be home before the goats get milked. Now, if you and the rest can muffle the jingoistic egotism we can start working on the real lesson attendant upon the abuses at Abu Ghraib Prison, which is that Americans are not “better” in any existential sense than Iraqis, Arabs, Muslims, or whatever category — we have the same proportion of horses’ asses and violent assholes as any other bunch of people; the only difference is that we stifle them whenever possible, instead of handing them Civil Service jobs with step increases and bonuses for number of babies tortured.

    At the root of that is the absolute truth: We have nothing that everybody else in the world doesn’t have except a set of procedures. Those procedures can be learned by anybody, anybody who learns and employs them will have a similar level of success, and we’re happy as Hell to teach them to anybody who’ll listen because one of the principles they’re based on is “the more the merrier.” We don’t need twenty-seven million sullen dependents, but we’d be dancing in the streets if we had twenty-seven million new customers.

    And if the Iraqis learn that they can have, as a byproduct, the scariest Army in the Middle East, for real instead of in Saddam’s vainglorious pronouncements — the best part of that being that we, Americans, will have nothing whatever to fear from it, because if they do it our way (suitably modified to accommodate their culture) it won’t be an enemy even when it’s an opponent. France has a pretty good Army. France opposes us in a lot of ways. Are we scared of the French Army? Poo.

    Regards,
    Ric

  58. JHoward says:

    – The Dems are into the “sadlings” territory now, trumping up hysterical hypotheticals.

    Lantos, that rotting, decrepit lackey, preempted Petraeus with the instruction not to bother with statistics and charts or some such. A congressman telling a general testifying under oath to Congress not to bother with statistics and charts.

    I detect an air of speechlessness in this thread; as if there aren’t words to describe the — pardon my language — self-fucking the Democrats, in all their blind rage, submitted themselves to today. For me the perspective about Democrats always hangs on that list of Clinton whitehousers and congressliars virtually unanimously calling for Saddam’s head.

    Transparency doesn’t even describe it any more. What does? I’m at a loss too.

  59. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    At the root of that is the absolute truth: We have nothing that everybody else in the world doesn’t’t have except a set of procedures.

    – Well actually we do have one more thing. Something the Eastern/third world banana Republics simply cannot come to grips with, nor believe.

    – For all our military and Industrial might, we are without doubt the most charitable and giving country in the world, and frustratingly ambivalent about our power. The West just doesn’t buy it. Or in the worlds of one of our own “….tortured and raped, burned entire villages to the ground in the manner of Jhangus Khan….”.

    – The Left is infected with that same jingoistic disbelief, awaiting the Great Satan’s final push to world dominance, and subjugation of the masses. It never seems to occur to them that there’s something wrong with that picture, and the simplest examinations would show them that.

    Stealing Iraqi oil. By now, what with the bill so far, anyone for 1000 dollars a barrel? Its very seriously like talking to children.

  60. keninnorcal says:

    OK, after today, here is my gut reaction.

    I am less than enthused at the Republican candidates that I could vote for, but after today, there is NO WAY I could ever vote vote for a Democratic candidate of national consequence. Absolutely NO WAY I could let anyone of such mind numbingly stupid platitudes determine how my children live: free in a stimluatic world, or alternately in a chador subject to her husband’s whims.

    Yeah, there’s a decision that anyone that has children loves to make…

  61. Ric Locke says:

    BB, I lump that under “procedure”.

    It must be said that we didn’t invent the procedures, unless you call backing into them by mistake “invention”. A good example is the way our military is organized.

    For millenia, people who organized armies went for the scariest individuals they could find. Vikings and berserkers, natural-born killers; the thought was that if you got enough of those together you could walk over everybody.

    Especially post-Viet Nam, American culture won’t tolerate that. We don’t approve of wild-eyed killers, and we started rooting them out and teaching the milder versions the advantage of cooperation and civil behavior. Then one morning we woke up to the astonishing realization that that works better.

    It’s obvious in retrospect, of course. The whole point of an Army is that it’s a bunch of guys working together, reinforcing one another in support of gaining the objective. People who joy in the slaughter don’t cooperate worth a damn, as a rule, and if you suppress or eject such people what you have is a bunch of guys who can and do keep it all downrange, instead of haring off in search of the delightful crunch of individual enemies’ skulls. Instead of a rarefied gas of individuals bouncing from one spot to another in search of “honor” and self-gratification, you get a solid wall that breathes fire — and the individuals who make it up can be, and almost always are, nice folks who are far more likely to take a stray dog in, feed it, and teach it to fetch than they are to run over it with a tank.

    But if you can’t see how that works it’s utterly counterintuitive. Of course if you want a dangerous army it has to be made of dangerous people, it “stands to reason”. So when they see a scary army they automatically assume that the soldiers who form it have to be “killbots”, because they haven’t made the mental leap. Cuchulain couldn’t make Corporal in today’s Marine Corps — and the Marine Corps is deadlier for it. We didn’t plan it that way. It just happened, and it’s gonna take a long time before some people figure it out.

    Regards,
    Ric

  62. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    …. and it’s gonna take a long time before some people figure it out.

    – If todays performance by Democrats leading up to, and during the hearing, is any indication of their understanding of the world in general, and the Iraq situation in particular, we’re in for a long, hard WOT.

    – As far as our enemies, dealing with the Jihadists becomes an adjustment of that “proceedure”, noticing as time goes on UBL and his happy band of followers will find their options thinning badly, and the heart finally goes out of the Celiphate movement. The “Copperheads” among us, not so much.

    – I take heart that noone, no matter how misguided and fanatically motivated, can juggle “Teh Stupid” balls forever.

  63. Slartibartfast says:

    Americans do not want to steal their country or their oil

    Agreed, but not because we’re nice, or anything. No, we’re even more evil than the oil-stealing, country-raping version of America that you hear about in the liberal press: we want these people to keep their sterile patches of sand, and sell us the oil. I mean, if we had to send contractors into the various middle-east hellholes and extract the oil ourselves, it’d cost over $100 a barrel.

    Devious, innit?

  64. Slartibartfast says:

    Cynn: your skepticism would go over much better if there was something else there. If all you’ve got to offer is teh snark, quit wasting our time.

  65. Major John says:

    “We didn’t plan it that way. It just happened, and it’s gonna take a long time before some people figure it out.”

    I dunno – I remember the old saw that was bandied about in the early 1800s, not long after Napoleon’s little Egyptian adventure:

    1 Mameluke cavalryman vs. 1 French Dragoon = dead Frenchman.

    10 Mamelukes vs 10 Frenchmen = stalemate.

    100 Mamelukes vs 100 Frenchmen = a bunch of dead Mamelukes.

    And it wasn’t “whatever happens we have got, the Maxim gun and they have not.” At least at that point in time…

  66. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    – MJ – The psych folder on Jihadists says that in any number over 6 or more, not hiding on rooftops sniping schoolyards, or in a peroxide loaded vehical parked in a busy market place, they tend not to work and play well together. Something about a lack of “proceedure”.

  67. Slartibartfast says:

    Peroxide-loaded vehicle? What, they’re having their hair done?

  68. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    – You have a point. It would be plastique, or some such in Baghdad. They save the blonde moments for their adventures in Germany.

  69. Matt, Esq. says:

    The one depressing thought I keep having is while it seems like anyone with common sense would recognize that the democrats are a. making fools out of themselves b. undermining their country, the MSM will simply cover up for them and shine the spotlight back on Petreaus, claiming he’s lying, though its obvious to anyone that he’s not.

    I keep hoping/wishing that the country will come to its senses and recognize when the world’s worst terrorist (or a good impersonator) is openly quoting democratic talking points, you’re on the wrong side of the fight.

  70. BJTexs says:

    Ric and BB: Your point is well taken.

    A classic example of the “killbots” vs. modern soldier argument is Special Operations. The commandos of yore were made up of the most fanatical death wish psychos whose sole pupose was to kill/destroy in greatest numbers with no thought to their own survival. They were the palace guard, the ones who surrounded Saddam with bright eyed fanaticism, as if that were enough.

    Compare and contrast Western Special Ops from SAS to Germany to the Masada Brigade right into JSOC. What was once a killing ground for fanatics (which largely defines what passes for operational practices in Middle Eastern countries) was redefined as the place for the toughest, fittest, most skilled and smartest soldiers in their respective armies. I’m not a military guy but have spent time talking to SEALS and Green Berets and have tried to read as much as I can. What’s clear to me is that the mission imperatives require a high degree of skill, competance and judgment in addition to courage and the willingness to sacrifice for the mission. This is reflected in the operations undertaken by these forces and in the professional support they recieve from line troops, whether they be Force Recon, or Rangers or Airborne, et al.

    This is the fundamental difference at the troop level from western armies (especially ours) and most of the rest of the ragtag world. This is also what a lot of leftists don’t get. Their moral and historical equivalency tests don’t allow them to see the fundamental differences between highly trained tough supremely competant soldiers in our Army and poorly trained, poorly coordinated youngsters randomly dropping rounds into a makeshift mortar while mumbling “Allahu Ahkbar!” Suicide bombing, while Islamic sexy and perfectly newsworthy, will not hold a territory, repel an invader or govern a nation. Just ask the Taliban.

    It is the complete misunderstanding of this fundamental fact (willful or not) that prevents the left from recognizing the strategic opportunities.

  71. Ric Locke says:

    Major John, the idea’s been around for a long time, as you note. Shoot, I’d go further: the Roman Army was the scariest thing on the planet for a long, long time, and the Romans did it that way, plus or minus cultural differences.

    The “needs scary people” meme is still the common perception, though, and army organizers accepted it until recently, even ours. Up until at least the Sixties, it was still fairly normal to tell young violent offenders to join the Army where that tendency could be put to use, and the whole “medals for valor” system was originally based on it and still has lingering tendencies in that direction. It wasn’t until you and your immediate predecessors started putting together the present system that the truth of the proposition started being tested. We still issue medals, and should, but the emphasis is different, that is, it’s easier by at least an order of magnitude to teach cooperative people to be scary than it is to get scary people to be cooperative. “Army or jail” isn’t an available option any more.

    As I said earlier, it’s obvious in retrospect — so obvious, in fact, that we find it hard to believe we used to work that way, and end up assigning features of older armies to motives familiar to us when that isn’t appropriate, like Lefties assuming that the Founding Fathers had the same cultural attitude toward slavery that we do and were therefore villains because they maintained the system anyway.

    Regards,
    Ric

  72. Mikey NTH says:

    Another scary iteration was the New Model Army, Cromwell’s Ironsides. The cavaliers had similar skills and zeal, but it was the discipline and control of the ironsides that made them superior. When the ironside cavalry charged they didn’t head pell-mell into everything and anything, they held together, and when the recall was sounded they stopped and came back.

    That control, engrained, is the key.

  73. jeremy says:

    Rick Locke is the best commenter on the Intarwebs. And, that is saying something because there are some pretty solid, smart and clever people posting here and on other sites.

    Just thought I’d give him props.

  74. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    – Take it easy Jeremy…..We have trouble getting his head through the Pub swinging doors as it is….Heh

  75. Great Mencken's Ghost says:

    Just a thought — Every Democratic candidate for the White House comes from the contemptible Congress we watched soil its diapers yesterday.

  76. N. O'Brain says:

    “#

    Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/11 @ 7:23 am #

    Another scary iteration was the New Model Army, Cromwell’s Ironsides. The cavaliers had similar skills and zeal, but it was the discipline and control of the ironsides that made them superior. When the ironside cavalry charged they didn’t head pell-mell into everything and anything, they held together, and when the recall was sounded they stopped and came back.

    That control, engrained, is the key.”

    See, Household Brigade, Heavy Cavalry, Waterloo.

    Although I really want a copy of that famous painting of the charge of the Scots Greys.

  77. BJTexs says:

    GMG:

    Which gives us some hope for the electorate who have rejected Presidential Candidates from the chamber for over 40 years. Too many inconvenient voting records to parse…

  78. Slartibartfast says:

    Revisiting peroxide, I’d probably go the urea nitrate route, myself. Pretty much all you need is nitric acid.

    And urine. But everyone‘s got urine.

  79. BJTexs says:

    Slart:

    Is that what you used on the fjords? :-)

  80. Swen Swenson says:

    There’s another facet to the superiority of the US military: Education. A couple of friends hired on to teach military skilz over in Saudi and found that it is exceedingly difficult to train the uneducated to do much more than ‘load rifle, point rifle, pull trigger’. Find the fire control solution and point your artillery in the right direction? Not without an at least rudimentary grasp of trig (this was before computer-driven fire control but you’ve still got the GIGO problem). Maintain the electronics of a jet fighter? Not so much.

    This suggests to me that creating a modern army in Iraq will be an uphill struggle. Our trainers over in Iraq certainly appear to be doing yeoman’s work and perhaps they have a slight leg up in that at least some education was allowed in Iraq beyond rote memorization of the Quran.

    Still, it will be years before the Iraqis can close the education gap. But with our help they just might and that alone ought to scare the crap out of their neighbors.

  81. Slartibartfast says:

    Is that what you used on the fjords? :-)

    It makes for nice, random-seeming…er…rivulets, doesn’t it?

    Back to Petraeus: in my opinion, there’s no sense even trying to discuss this with some people. I mean, when otherwise well-educated folks say things like:

    Oh please. We knew damn well what he was going to say. There’s nothing I can do about it, but please don’t expect me to feign surprise or belief in his independence.

    Posted by: Katherine | September 11, 2007 at 10:30 AM

    Specifically, what I think is complete bullsh*t, is the idea that saying that Petraeus is saying what the Bush administration wants him to say is akin to challenging his honor. Bush is Crocker’s boss, & can give legally binding orders to Petraeus. For Petraeus to depart from the administration’s line on this is about as likely as Obama’s press secretary to reveal that he kind of prefers Hillary, & for me to get up and court and say “your honor, my boss wrote that argument in our brief but I actually think it’s totally wrong.” I’m sure he has some control over the particular content of his Power Point, but buying & selling the administration line on the state of things in Iraq is an essential part of why he was selected for this job, & why he’s keeping it.

    Posted by: Katherine | September 11, 2007 at 10:34 AM

    Get that, everyone? You’re not an honest officer until you’re a retired officer, unless you’re Eric Shinseki. It’s almost as if a military officer has no free will at all until he’s retired, and must follow every order absolutely. Again, unless that officer is Eric Shinseki. It’s a binary world: those who agree with you, and lying bastards.

  82. Slartibartfast says:

    I mean, really: the notion that Petraeus might actually be in accord with what he’s presenting can’t seem to even make a token appearance.

  83. Cowboy is a compliment says:

    -Devious, innit?

    Actually, being in the business, we do send contractors to all those “middle-east hell holes and extract the oil ourselves.” We always have. You don’t think the locals have the skills or can develop the equipment to do it, do you? They just collect the checks.

  84. Slartibartfast says:

    Yeah, I actually do think that the locals can be trained to do it. Not the surveys and such, but certainly the dirty work. If it were rocket science, you’d have to have a degree to do it.

  85. Cowboy is a compliment says:

    Most hydrocarbon development is very high tech these days, and you do need need degrees. We do have some grunt work that is farmed out, but even then we tend to ship in labor from the Philipines or other places to get people that are actually willing to work. All the technical staff running the job comes from G7 nations.

  86. Big Bang (Pumping you up) says:

    – All of which is by contrast with the UAE, which got it right, way back during the very first “oil crisus” in the early 70’s, although they actually started the process even earlier in the late 60’s. They hired companies like Gen. Dyn. and others to build, equip, and man entire “towns”, replete with libraries, townhalls, schools, police stations, prisons, McDonalds, Electric plants, hospitals, waste disposal operations, light and heavy manufacturing facilities, gas stations, the works. Then they paired Emirate families with each American family, and the teaching went forth. At the end of 5 years the towns were handed over completely to the Arab families.

    – Aside from getting a real jump start society wise, they also built a security infrastructure that we could be jealous of. Complete electronics survaliance, UAW’s, Advanced Radar, communications, ect. When is the first or last time you read about any “incidents” in the UAE. Terrorists couldn’t blow a fart in their country without a squad of special Ops forces pulling down their shorts and checking butt cracks. Thats why the Dubai dustup was so totally partisan politics. They have the best port/shipping/airlines security, tracking, and detection/inspection systems in the world.

  87. Rusty says:

    #

    Comment by Slartibartfast on 9/11 @ 8:19 am #

    Revisiting peroxide, I’d probably go the urea nitrate route, myself. Pretty much all you need is nitric acid.

    And urine. But everyone’s got urine.

    I think it’s chosen(peroxide) because it is clear and relatively odorless compared to urea nitrate. Plus you only need one other innocuous component to cause destruction. And thats as far as I’m going to go because we don’t need idle hands messing about in the garage.

  88. Mikey NTH says:

    BJ: that painting was in my mind, as were reports of British armor in the Western Desert. The British tankers, early on, would charge after a retreating German tank force (IIRC) to fall into an anti-tank gun trap. It took time, and losses, to emphasize the message of control.

    As (IIRC) Josephus said of the Roman Legions “Their drills are bloodless battles, and their battles are bloody drills.” I would want the calm professional on my flank, not some psycho.

    Or as Colour-Sergeant Bourne said in “Zulu”, “Steady, lads.”

Comments are closed.