As Howard Dean recently reminded us, the left really is all for fighting the war on terror—just not in Iraq, which they don’t view as a legitimate front in the terror war. And, as they never tire of explaining to those of us who support the President’s strategy, their complaint is not that Saddam was removed from power, or that a democratic Iraq is now in the offiing—after all, Saddam was a bad man, and democracy is a good thing (though for the record, containment was working)—but rather that the Iraq war diverts resources from the “real” war on terror, which is taking place in Afghanistan, where Usama Bin Laden continues to rule the mighty (and quite comfortably situated, given the lack of resources we’re able to bring to bear against them) forces of Al Qaeda, which constitute the real threat to the US (except when the President mentions it, at which time he is indulging an overblown scare tactic meant to divert our attention from the failures of Social Security Reform. But let’s not nitpick). And it is that war that the left is all for waging—brave, dissenting patriots that they are.
So let’s not hate them for trying to save us from ourselves.
Instead, Jon Henke has now put out a call for ALL anti-Iraq war protesters who howled when Karl Rove questioned their commitment to an extended and difficult campaign of fighting terrorists on the battlefield, to run—RUN!—to the nearest military recruiting center to sign up for some mountainous hand to hand combat against Al Qaeda forces in the higher elevations of Afghanistan. After all—joining up and fighting is the only legitimate way to show your support, we now know—especially given the diversion of resources from the real fight the Iraq war has caused.
Remember: the chickenhawk meme was never about demagoguery. It’s about putting your money where your mouth is at a time when resources are scarce. And I’m sure we can count on the left to do just that.
So. Iraq dissenters to Afghanistan! FEAR THE CHARGE OF THE ARMY OF DEDICATED MOVEON.ORG PATRIOTS, AL QAEDA! HOO-AH!
****
update Or, alternately, we can just admit that this whole line of argument is utter bullshit and purge it from the realm of reasoned debate. Anyone…?
(h/t Karol)
…Agreed. But what is unreasonable—and what is at the heart of the chickenhawk argument—is the suggestion that there is only a single way to “sacrifice” and “advocate”—namely, by picking up a rifle. Which is like saying the only way to fight homelessness is to let a few vagrants camp out in your rumpus room. Otherwise, you’re nothing more than a ChickenANTI-HOMELESSNESShawk.
Jeff: Since the left proudly points out its support for the real war–finding and arresting bin Laden–maybe they’ll sign up for the Afghan border police. With an abundance of these recruits from the left, they can line up along the border with Pakistan, by linking arms, and therefore prevent illegal border crossing by the Taliban and al Qaeda remnants. Should be able to capture bin Laden in no time. Gosh, shoulda suggested this long ago!
It’s just that chickenshits can’t be chickenhawks.
What was it one pundit said some time ago?
Or something like that.
I’ve got an idea. Why don’t we divide the country in half. We’ll send half of the people to Afghanistan for vacation other Half to Iraq and after a few days of americans going “BATHROOM Can You Tell Me Where the BATHROOM Is HELOOOOO SPEAK ENglish?!” The terrorists will either surrender their weapons or kill themselves.
Is Michael Moore going to ask Dean et al. whether they’re going to send their sons to Afghanistan?
Are you suggesting that the military allows recruits to decide where they want to be deployed? Or are you just full of it?
For the record, NGOs such as Doctors Without Borders, who deploy in Afghanistan, have no recruiting shortfall.
Kinda blows your chickenshit protests out of the water, don’t you think?
Cynical ex-hippie doesn’t even bother to argue that the chickenhawk thing isn’t bullshit, he just changes the subject to the “hollowed-out” army.
“Or, alternately, we can just admit that this whole line of argument is utter bullshit and purge it from the realm of reasoned debate. Anyone…? “
Bah. If you haven’t taken it upon yourself to make ChickenHawk arguments, then you have no right to comment on who should or should not make them.
Where is this mythical “realm of reasoned debate” of which you speak? Near the Plateau of Leng?
How a bout a rule that henceforth anyone using the discredited chickenhawk meme must be immediately slapped like a whiny little bitch by all others then present?
One slap per, and no implements. This ain’t “Airplane”.
And don’t call me Shirley.
I’m for the purge option – the high-colonic purge.
Wait, you mean soldiers don’t get to decide where they go to fight? Well, then how can I be sure that if I sign up to avoid being called a chickenhawk by the likes of cynical ex-hippie, above, I won’t have Hillary as President in a few years sending me out on some peacekeeping mission, under the command of some UN General, with which I completely disagree?
No. Now I can’t join, sorry. I don’t support that kind of action. I AM SIMPLY SHOWING BRAVERY BY DISSENTING! HOW DARE YOU QUESTION MY PATRIOTISM!
Where’s the reasoned debate going on? Someone forgot to send me the memo.
Umm, Cynical Ex, Docotors Without Borders fled Afghanistan awhile ago. Talib started killing them and they left. Of course, they might have come back since I redeployed home 3 months ago…
Jeff, unless the Moveon.org types can fly A-10s, leave ‘em home. Most of the Moveon.org types I have seen don’t quite look like they could hump a full combat load up part of the Hindu Kush. Heck, it was hard enough for me to get around…
Reasoned debate? Heck, I’m for seasoned debate.
SW: “Picture” a debate with paprika.
ex-hippie, I don’t seem to recall long lines of left-leaning recuits after 9/11 as we were preparing for war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, who were at the time harboring Bin Ladin. (which was long before Iraq was invaded)
What I seem to recall was the shriek of hysterical peace-at-any-price lefties that are now howling for cut-n-run in Iraq.
You remember that too?
But they sure do love the troops. That’s never in doubt, happily.
Uh, no, recruits can’t dictate where they go. However, members of the military can *request* a deployment or transfer to somewhere nice (I think there’s an installation in Key West, FL) or somewhere not as nice (Afganistan). The officers in charge can either issue or deny it.
Kinda blows your chickenshit protests out of the water, don’t you think?
Jeff gots dreamy eyes. If he was a chick he’d be hot.
Whew, for a second there, I read Murel’s comment as “if he was a chicken he’d be hot…” I read it carefully the second time and was not a little comforted.
I can’t really see him as being chicken-like, but he might be sort of peacock-like if he had a Billy Preston afro. And I bet he’s hiding pictures from the seventies where he did.
Oh, Murel, we’ve got lots of pictures.
But what is unreasonableâ€â€and what is at the heart of the chickenhawk argumentâ€â€is the suggestion that there is only a single way to “sacrifice†and “advocateâ€Ââ€â€namely, by picking up a rifle.
Okay hotstuff, give us some idea of your sacrifices as you challenged David Anderson to do regarding what his walk is. I mean, if you’re going to blow our poor ol’ argument out of the water with such masterful rhetoric, surely we deserve to be regaled with tales of your manly sacrifice.
Exposing your fraudulent arguments for what they are is about as much as you deserve.
I was assuming that stupid-string-of-ellipses and the ex-hippie were the same guy, but I guess not.
And neither has ever actually, you know, linked to evidence that there is a recruiting shortfall. Or, now, proof that Doctors Without Borders isn’t in the middle of a recruiting drought. I wouldn’t be surprised if both were true (the doctors because they do get to decide where they want to go), but I still ain’t just gonna buy if from some anonymous goalpost humper.
Not surprisingly you miss the point yet again, string of Extended Elipses. That point being that even a boxer, say, can put forth a good argument for nonviolence—while even a Democratic Presidential candidate who served in Vietnam can put forth a bad argument for how to fight a war.
So has ellipses moved to Argentina yet?
Y’know, I keep seeing the ‘anti-war’ crowd refer to the Chickenhawk meme as an ‘argument’, as if it contained some sort of logical conclusion requiring refutation, and which, barring such refutation, would require a major policy shift in the conduct of the War. And yet, after a careful reading of posts such as Cynical Ex-hippy’s, the only ‘arguments’ I can see them putting forth could be paraphrased as:
1) Neener neener, you suck!
2) Just admit that the War is unjust… but not unjust enough to want to reverse the result of it, or anything. Just unjust enough that you should admit that you’re bad for supporting it. Seriously, a little guilt is all I want.
3) I have an opinion and it’s different from yours, so pay attention to me, dammit!
Yes Jeff, a boxer can put forth a good argument for non violence. But, you know, he actually went to jail for his belief.
You, on the other hand, just sit behind your rather tired put downs and armadillo superiority dance and haven’t done jack. Well, that’s not precisely true. You’ve certainly done your part in the hard work of fighting in the 101 propagandist brigade, but somehow I think that picking off fifth columners like me is considered to be girly boy activity in the real man’s work – say like Doctors without Borders.
And what’s with these flies doing the heavy Nazi implications? I mean, do these idiots actually know history or are they truly zombies who just get scripts they can barely read. Wait, don’t answer that.
Still, amusing in kind of a dawn of the dead way.
Ouch. Now that really stung, Extended Elipses. You struck right at my soul.
String o’ FooBar,
When DWB starts needing 125,000 doctors to deploy simultaneously, get back to me with the comparisons. They’re doing wonderful work, but needing only 1% of the personpower is hardly a comparison.
And since we’re in the you-can’t-advocate-for-it-if-you-haven’t-done-it mode, I think several commenters should start by aborting themselves.
SW “wrong”, as in “they felt as though his comments had done them wrong”.
“And what’s with these flies doing the heavy Nazi implications? I mean, do these idiots actually know history or are they truly zombies who just get scripts they can barely read. Wait, don’t answer that.”
I don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about, and you just proved Godwin’s Law, so I think I just adhere to your last sentence.
Yeah, that had me scratching my head too, Matt. Similarly, didn’t Major John address the Doctors Without Borders thing above?
Jeff, try as I might, I simply can’t hit a target that isn’t there.
Matt, I guess you don’t get the “retiring to Argentina” bit, Mr. Moore (hey, are you just as fat as your namesake? Just kidding) or the “Herr dot dot from the other thread”. Still, all just part of the script with you zombies.
Yes, right, I have no soul, my commenters are all mindless zombies, only you can speak the truth, only you see through the lies, Jeff’s a chickenhawk propagandist who has never done anything of worth—well, leastways nothing so valuable as spending time here commenting repeatedly on Jeff’s worthlessness—blah blah blah.
You keep right on attacking me, Extended Elipse, if that’s what keeps you from feeling totally worthless. Me, I’m plenty secure.
Really? That’s why you keep bringing up this subject? If true, you’d just let it be and sneer in smug silence. But you’ve made it a point of honor. You couldn’t resist its siren call.
Kind of hard for me to understand what I get out of this, being anonymous n’ all. Is it the satisfaction of getting beaten up by your zombie corp??? Is it the pleasure of seeing my anonymous words on your comment stream? Yea, Jeff. It’s making my entire day and keeping me from the edge of an existential suicide binge.
Still, glad I reminded you about the armadillo. It was sad to think a Friday would go by without the little guy.
Ciao bella
Heh, I’d like to see a “suicide binge.” That’d be a neat trick, but that phrase is about par for the course in your style of argumentation. Not much of a logician, are you?
Nope, I didn’t catch the Argentina thing, and I don’t understand it. You’re an idiot, not a Nazi.
Did anyone else miss their script in the mail? Rove is pretty fucking smart, but sometimes even he doesn’t put on enough postage.
I’ve been wondering the same thing. But knock yourself out. You do really seem to need it.
“Waaah! Nobody agrees with meeee!!!”
Well done, Dots.
Or perhaps Periods is your name.
Some observations:
1) If a person makes the true statement that we have legitimate strategic interests in winning in Iraq, that statement is true regardless of whether that person is active military, chickenhawk or peacenik on his way to serve in Afghanistan.
2) “Going to jail for your beliefs” or even blowing yourself up for your religion may both be strong proofs of the strengths of your convictions, but neither of these are legitimate demonstrations of the validity of your arguments.
3) The claim
conflates the issue of the veracity of the argument with the question of how strongly a person advocating that position feels towards that position. A person might arguably believe in the truth of a proposition without feeling any compelling need to martyr himself to demonstrate the depth of his convictions.
I am left in wonder at the amazingly poor quality of the arguments being put forward by many of those on the left. I think it should be clear to any moderate that the left is utterly bankrupt, both morally and intellectually, and that all they have left is to throw out ad hominem attacks and distracting comments to draw attention away from their incredibly large and ever accumulating number of bone-headed beliefs.
brainsssssss
tw: lived, what the?
Just for the sake of argument, let’s pretend that I am a chickenhawk: a Giant Sack O’ Hypocrisy who lacks the courage of his convictions, yadda yadda.
Does this say anything about the merits of the pro-war argument? Or is it just, you know, a fragrant wad of ad hominem?
Because it sure seems like attacking motives. Maybe some kind-hearted lefty can explain the NUANCE to me.
I like the sound of “Giant Sack O’ Hypocrisy”. Band name, anyone? Me, I can’t even play a video on my laptop so don’t expect me to do anything but hum.
“second”, as in “in my second life I’ll learn me to play some musical instruments”
A person might arguably believe in the truth of a proposition without feeling any compelling need to martyr himself to demonstrate the depth of his convictions.
ROFL!!!!
Keep ‘em coming because – you know – everything is happy happy happy.
Nothing so brave as the anonymous troll.
Frankly, you’re adding nothing to the conversation. And life is too short to put up with a string of meanspirited ad hominem from someone who is too much of a pussy even to sign his own opinions. Goodbye, Extended Elipses.
…… – got some really bad, bad news for you.
I put my money where my mouth is a long time ago. I got out when my base was shut down and there was nothing left for me to do. Now, I can’t go back in – too old and not physically up to the standards the Marines require.
So now, I’ve advocated something I put my neck on the line for, which, according to your limited ability to reason, means my support for the war is valid.
Now, pray tell you never call 911 if you need a cop since YOU’RE AFRAID TO JOIN THE POLICE FORCE TO SHOW YOUR SUPPORT!!!!
Christ, anonymous cowards are funny.
TW – Hell. Reminds me of Parris Island
So if the only proper action of somebody who supports the war is to enlist immediately, what is the required action of somebody who opposes the war?
From the looks of things, it seems to involve ordering a Soy latte, instead of the usual Skim latte.
I think the whole chickenhawk thing boils down to “if you really beleive that this is a clash of civilization you need to be on the front line.”
So by that logic, leftists who claim to have supported Afghanistan or Haiti or Kososvo, beleived those operations were important enough to sendi someone else but not at the “clash of civilization” level, so they didn’t have to go themselves.
They support only the unimportant wars.
I see that the anti-war crowd is now trying to make the claim that the group Doctors without Borders is composed entirely of left leaning individuals. Which makes sense, because in the history of man there has never been a physician that had political leanings to the right.
The simple sad truth is that the left, these days, is too stupid to be trusted with power.