Blogcritics: Comments on The Song, Not the Singer: Bush On the War

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 21:32:05 EDT

C'mon, wasn't the missile defense system crucial in "North by North West"? Jebus Jumped up Christ on a Pogo Stick, where would that Cary Grant be without a missile defense system covering his sweet, sweet ass? You think he would have got his ashes hauled in a train going into a tunnel if it wasn't for a continental missile defense system? Hell No!

Comment by duane

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 17:15:38 EDT

Yeah, God knows that missiles have never helped us in the past. We don't need no stinking missiles.

Comment by Natalie Davis

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 14:55:52 EDT

Ah, a world of guided missiles and misguided men... I wonder if Dr. King is rolling proverbially in his grave.

Comment by JR

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 13:37:23 EDT

Well, the upside of that missile defense is that it will create jobs for what few science and engineering majors we produce in this country (although for most of the work we'll have to hire foreign students). It's actually kind of a neat socialist scam for techies: the government creates make-work jobs building a system that will never be used and never work anyway, and the libertarians cough up the money because they think their taxdollars are going to national defense. Hey, I'm starting to like this idea!

Comment by duane

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 13:28:14 EDT

Maybe not, but it will be designed to take out zeppelins and other large slow-moving objects. Yeah. Take 'em out good. Real good.

Comment by Shark

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 11:46:29 EDT

DAWN: They had an expert on there discussing the soon to be completed missile defense program. Imagine if you will, if the terrorists who used our planes against us on 9/11 had ICBM's instead. It's plausible, it's conceivable, and above all it's deeply disturbing." What's really disturbing is that we'll spend billions on that system and it can't take down CROP DUSTERS.

Comment by Natalie Davis

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:54:03 EDT

Exactly. It is time to sing a new song: "Let There Be Peace on Earth."

Comment by boomcrashbaby

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:43:19 EDT

Now it remains in our best interest to silence them. Ashcroft couldn't have said it better. So we give Iraq a democracy but strike out freedom of speech? We give them a free country as long as they don't speak ill of America? As an American who wants to fight terrorism, who wants to find a middle ground with different cultures who currently hate us, who wants to keep our country safe and who wants to maintain the freedoms our forefathers fought for...What IS the point of this philosophy?

Comment by Mark Edward Manning

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:08:31 EDT

Dawn: "You Canucks, always good for a laugh." LOL! I'm not sure whether Mr. Carruthers is a Canuck or a Limey - but either way, he surely hates Americans and is only here to antagonize us. I am used to his type on my other blogsite. I agree with him 100 percent that the War on Drugs is a farce and a disgrace, and fills our prisons with unnecessary prisoners, but that would be the extent of what I agree with him on ... in other affairs, I believe we have liberated Iraq not only in terms of the moderate Muslim population who suffered under Saddam, but also the radical Islamofascist elements that Saddam also repressed. Just because a man like Sadr was silenced under Saddam's Ba'athist regime didn't make it right. Now that Saddam is gone, we are unearthing all the other elements that we need to forcibly rid the Middle East of. In that sense, the war in Iraq was very much worth it. Now it remains in our best interest to silence them.

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:01:22 EDT

How about the problems caused by the USA regieme invading and occupying a sovereign country? Y'know, you could have done the same thing in Haiti, but they don't have, like, oil. And they're closer, not that the reserves you are sending to Iraq would know the difference or where they are.

Comment by P6

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 22:55:05 EDT

Okay, let's finish the job in Iraq. What is it? Understand that we are looking at the current situation and seeing a major problem. The Iraqis are looking at the same situation and seeing a major problem. But because of our different perspectives, we see different problems. So whose problems are we going to solve?

Comment by lk

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 22:24:34 EDT

Iraq never was, is not and probably will never be the forefront of the war on terror. There was a toothless tiger there. Willie Sutton robbed banks because that's where the money was. We should invade countries where the terrorists are, and they were not there, and the WMD intel was a mistake, but we never admit mistakes (see last night's press conf). Bush is dumb too.

Comment by Dawn

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:18:46 EDT

Jim, what you mean to ask is "WHEN DO I EVER NOT BEAT MY CHILDREN?" The answer is: when they are asleep. As for the TWAT thing, if it weren't so funny, I would be offended. You Canucks, always good for a laugh.

Comment by Hal Pawluk

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:31:06 EDT

Dawn: "... seems many of those commenting have lefty blinders on and can't see the forest for the trees. Seriously, when did this site become a haven for such across the board looney left noodniks? It's really disgusting and makes me feel kind of squeamish about coming over here and commenting."Do you really think the classic extreme right tactic of name-calling actually adds anything to a discussion? Or the power of your argument? Or your credibility? Be that as it may, I'm not a "lefty" (not even a Democrat) and I haven't heard anyone of any political stripe even suggesting "...we shouldn't fight the war on terrorism." Like many in this country, including an increasing number of rational Republicans, I agree that the invasion of Iraq was a bad idea that actually took resources from the "war on terrorism." In fact, there seems to be a growing sense that the occupation of Iraq is counter-productive, creating far more Radical Islamists than ever existed before the unilateral invasion. I agree with that, too. Personally, I'd like to see the war against Radical Islamists in places like Afghanistan, Pakistan and Indonesia getting the emphasis it requires. Note that none of the above has anything to do with any particular political label - it's simply a position on security and foreign policy that is not the same as yours. And for W, I'll leave with a quote from Heinlein: "Never frighten a little man. He'll kill you."

Comment by Mark Edward Manning

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:57:04 EDT

"Don't try to disappear up your own arsehole, that could create a rift in the space-time contiuum ..." Way to go, Jim. You must be taking lessons from Shark on how to sound intelligent.

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:49:32 EDT

is there some other chunk of the bible that makes it ok? Mark, there's always a chunk of the bible that makes it okay. It's a regular 24 hour justification stand. It's not about morality, it's about justification.

Comment by boomcrashbaby

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:42:18 EDT

they are determined that something shall be done about the fanatics trying to kill us. It's possible to be against what Bush is doing and for doing something about the fanatics trying to kill us. If one is opposed to what Bush is doing means one is against fighting terrorism, well....talk about blinders.

Comment by Mark Saleski

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:42:10 EDT

Thank God for the pro-W.o.T liberals i'm an atheist so i suppose i shouldn't comment, but back when i was a catholic boy i seem to remember there being a commandment that said something like "thou shalt not kill". so seriously, what do the christians out there think about this? is there some other chunk of the bible that makes it ok?

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:33:22 EDT

Hey, why don't you all band together as the Tenacious Warriors Against Terrorism? Think what a great big bunch of TWAT's could do!

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:26:54 EDT

Mark Edward Manning: Thank God for the pro-W.o.T liberals. Don't try to disappear up your own arsehole, that could create a rift in the space-time contiuum, which would, y'know be really nasty for the rest of the world outside the USA.

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:21:00 EDT

Eric, if you've seen Orgazmo you will realize they didn't accomplish any of those goals, even with dildos on their heads. Which is why I quoted it. G-Fresh.

Comment by Mark Edward Manning

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:19:58 EDT

"Seriously, when did this site become a haven for such across the board looney left noodniks?" They do seem to rule the roost here, big-time. Some of the people here are so wound up in their lefty extremism, they'll attack fellow liberals like Laurie K., Dawn and Eric ... and I know I have a reputation for being very tough on liberals, but there is a certain species of Liberalis americanus, like the editors of The Nation, who actually understand what is at stake in Iraq and the war on terror. OK, so they disagree with Bush, the Republicans and conservatives on domestic policy. What's happening internationally should be the primary concern, and instead of whining about civilian casualities (hey, that's war for you!), they are determined that something shall be done about the fanatics trying to kill us. Thank God for the pro-W.o.T liberals.

Comment by boomcrashbaby

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:18:24 EDT

Dawn, I think the left and the right are in agreement that we need to fight terrorism. The debate comes from how. Why are you squeamish about differences of opinion? What's disgusting? That we all don't put our 'righty' blinders on and agree? On a different note, referring to my comment that Bush is waging his reelection on the successful rebuilding of Iraq: here we are almost 24 hours later and I've read from news sites that the Phillipines are probably going to withdraw their troops and Japan, France and Russia are telling their contractors to go home.

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:05:13 EDT

Give me ONE good, well thought out and argued reason why we shouldn't finish the job in Iraq, or why we shouldn't fight the war on terrorism. Dawn, when did you stop beating your children? No excuses, Answer Me! The answer is that you shouldn't have begun the "job" in Iraq, and the "war on terrorism" is as valid as the "war on drugs" (as this week's testimony by Ashcroft reveals). It wouldn't be so bad if the USA had said "we're going to invade this country, and there's nothing you can do about it, so there". But you didn't. You lied. And did it anyway, like China in Tibet. Nobody likes a bully, but everybody hates a hypocrite. As I've said, it's probably going to wind up like the US invasion and occupation of the Philippines, a corrupt, despotic, kleptocracy. But you broke it, you bought it. And don't come whining to the rest of us when it all goes to baby shit (the worst kind).

Comment by Eric Olsen

Wed, 14 Apr 2004 18:58:18 EDT

although I do like this: "Go in the front, come out the back and fuck their shit up".