A Sober Plea for Ending the War in Iraq - Comments Page 3

Iraq is providing some painful realities which are about to kick us in the conscience

The events of 9/11 had a traumatic effect on the American people. It was the type of shock that could drive a society blind with rage or in our case, send us on a non-stop drinking binge. We were hurt, angry and determined to get revenge. We were vulnerable and in that moment we could be easily led to do many a rash thing. There is so much damage that can be done when a person is under the influence. Consider what we have inflicted on others as a nation drunk on power. During our wild swinging haze a group of men pointed through the fog and claimed to see our enemies. At the time we were ready to believe anything. We were ready to fight anyone and so we followed.…
Read comments below, or read this article from the beginning.

Article comments

  • 76 - STM

    Apr 09, 2008 at 5:37 am

    I love how this has veered completely off topic from the Dominion of British West Florida and back to Iraq.

    Come on guys, get your priorities right.

    You won't have any of these problems once the US returns to the Commonwealth, with Liz at the helm again and guided by those good and loyal folk who are setting the pace down there on the Gulf coast.

    And imagine how good the Stars and Stripes would look with a Union Jack in the corner.

    For a rough idea, google the State flag of Hawaii - the best-looking one in the Union :)

  • 77 - Dr Dreadful

    Apr 09, 2008 at 11:59 am

    Ah, now see, Stan, they're all wise to you now and ain't gonna take the bait.

    I think it's high time you wrote an article expanding on your leitmotif. That way, maybe a few BC newbies will read it in outraged innocence and the fun can start all over again.

  • 78 - Clavos

    Apr 09, 2008 at 1:24 pm

    Doc, you agitator, you!

    Wassamatah, bored?

  • 79 - Dr Dreadful

    Apr 09, 2008 at 1:30 pm

    Well, BC's fairly quiet at the moment, especially the Politics section, and particularly now that Arch seems to have sipped from the poisoned chalice and will be voting for McCain after all.

    We just need to get some really acrimonious debate going, and Stan's idea about the colonies returning to the imperial fold strikes me as the perfect kindling.

  • 80 - Clavos

    Apr 09, 2008 at 1:47 pm

    But, as you said, that one's gonna need new blood to get going again.

    Even monkeys learn not to touch the hot stove after a couple of repetitions.

  • 81 - bliffle

    Apr 10, 2008 at 12:20 pm

    Looks like the BC staff has instituted a blackout on the political front, probably to spare the tender ears of Iraq Invasion supporters from more discomfiting news and observations from alarmed US citizens.

    Just in case no one noticed, General Petraeus testified to the Senate and the House on the progress of The Escalation. Oh, we can call it an escalation now, not a surge, because it is to continue, not diminish, because it failed to result in Iraqi Political improvement so we've got to keep doing it (by the perverse logic of the current Administration). Oh well, another failure that will be rewarded by continuation instead of being ended. Just like all the previous failed plans and the very people who pushed for them, including Maximum Leader himself.

    But we have learned one thing from the exercise: why Petraeus (presuming he's as good as the PR which preceded him) wasn't made El Jeffe years ago so (since he's so good) we could have ended the war/occupation years ago?

    Why would President God deprive us of this General Moses who could deliver us from the Iraq desert?

    I asked this question of everyone I could find and no one volunteered an answer.

    Now we know the answer: Petraeus is not a strategist and has no strategy. All he's got is his same old short term tactics, namely, seize-and-hold (oh, and hold some more).

    Petraeus doesn't have the intellectual tools to win this thing. He got the military tools he said he needed, but he has no strategy to push this thing over the top.

    We're back to the same old War Of Attrition. Looks like we've Vietnamized the Iraq Invasion.

  • 82 - Christopher Rose

    Apr 10, 2008 at 12:27 pm

    Responding to your first point, bliffle, the BC "staff" can't and don't shape or limit the content here, so there's an easy solution if you've not seen something covered, sign up and write it yourself.

    Easy, huh?

  • 83 - Dr Dreadful

    Apr 10, 2008 at 12:55 pm

    Astonishingly, REMF, you're right.

    Average height for a Viking male was more like 5'7".

    However, before you get too excited about this, you might want to take a peek at this, which reports that the average height for northern Europeans as a whole during the 9th to 11th centuries (the Vikings' heyday) was about 5'8" - making the Norsemen shorter than most. Oops...

    As for Clav - must be the Irish half...

  • 84 - Dr Dreadful

    Apr 10, 2008 at 12:56 pm

    Ah, the comment I was responding to has gone. Without expanding on the obvious reasons why, REMF was boasting about the stature of his Viking ancestors.

  • 85 - Dan Miller

    Apr 10, 2008 at 1:28 pm

    Dave,

    I done speaked me some Amurrican!

    I am distressed to learn that you are one of Senator Clinton's speech writers. You hurrible secret jes can't be hid no mo.

    Shame on you.

    Dan

  • 86 - Clavos

    Apr 10, 2008 at 1:43 pm

    Re # 83:

    According to your two links, Doc, both halves contribute to my prodigious height (72"), as the material you cited shows the Swedes to have been the tallest among the Scandahoovians, while the Irish are also shown in the second citation to be above the average height of the rest of the cohort to which they are compared.

    What can I say? I have good genes...

    So, why ain't I rich???

  • 87 - bliffle

    Apr 10, 2008 at 2:41 pm

    Petraeus was a flop. He simply has no answers for our crisis in Iraq. What next for President Gump? Who will be the next military victime to step up for failure just to get another star?

    I didn't catch the first part of the hearings. Did they actually swear Petraeus in this time? Last time they didn't. And Ray McGovern was ejected from chambers for trying to direct the congressmens attention to that fact.

    But who cares whether Petraeus is sworn in to tell the truth? Nobody, I suspect.

  • 88 - Dr Dreadful

    Apr 10, 2008 at 3:43 pm

    Clav: my prodigious height (72")...

    Then where did Emmy get the notion that you're only 5'6"?

    I'm glad Chris left my comment up, because even the results of the five minutes' research I did were so deliciously poetic that it would have been a damn shame not to share them.

    And to pre-empt any anti-Anglic griping from Emmy, I should point out here that I'm descended from Vikings myself.

  • 89 - Clavos

    Apr 10, 2008 at 4:38 pm

    Then where did Emmy get the notion that you're only 5'6"?

    Beats me, Doc. Didn't know he thought that; I don't pay much attention to his comments.

  • 90 - Dr Dreadful

    Apr 10, 2008 at 5:15 pm

    Didn't know he thought that

    It comes under the 'MCH Exception'. Chris (and by extension, I) ruthlessly deletes those comments as soon as he spots them.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Nov 09, 2009

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for October

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs