IT'S A DANGEROUS WORLD: Hitlers, Iran, extremist groups, traitor Dems, WMDs from garden shops
"Unfortunately, on too many issues, some in Congress are behaving as if America is not at war," Bush said during a speech at the [far right] Heritage Foundation.
"This is no time for Congress to weaken the Department of Justice by denying it a strong and effective leader [who will allow to continue to torture prisoners by waterboarding them] ..." said Bush, as reported by the Associated Press today.
"Now we're at the start of a new century, and the same debate is once again unfolding, this time regarding my policy in the Middle East ... 'Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them. And the question is, will we listen?"
Whenever the horrendous administration of George W. Bush wishes to push the current war, pimp its methods, or lobby for a new war, Hitler is invoked.
If there is an enemy or future enemy of the United States, it is always compared to Hitler and Nazi Germany. And the Bush administration is the lonely Winston Churchill, warning that the new Mr. Hitlers -- last week, Iran and its leaders -- must not be appeased.
If you do not support George W. Bush's requests or landmine-masquerading-as-nominee-for-attorney-general, you are an appeaser in the war on terror and want the new Hitlers to win.
And you are probably trying to stab the country in the back right now. I know I am.
Glenn Greenwald regularly explains the practice. And here is one recent post.
Consigned to page A19 of today's Los Angeles Times, probably because it's no longer particularly newsy or surprising:
"Under siege in April 2006, when a series of retired generals denounced [Don Rumsfeld] and called for his resignation in newspaper op-ed pieces, Rumsfeld produced a memo after a conference call with military analysts. 'Talk about Somalia, the Philippines, etc. Make the American people realize they are surrounded in the world by violent extremists,' he wrote."
When it is time to whet the appetite for launching a sneak attack on a much smaller nation, many Americans now know that the much smaller nation must begin to appear regularly on the front pages of the daily newspaper. This is to prepare the polity with justifications for the potential sneak attack or trumped-up incident/circumstance used to preface the sneak attack.
"Wider Iranian threat feared," claimed the Los Angeles Times, above the fold, on Wednesday.
Iranians may seize diplomatic personnel, said anonymous officials to the LATimes. This raises "the danger of an escalation..."
"An on the ground clash could be sparked, say current and former officials, by a confronatation along the 900-mile-long border between Iran and Iraq, or in the waters of the Persian Gulf. Or it could be ignited over one of the periodic US attempts to arrest those members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps in Iraq."
Iran is itching for a fight. And when and if we smite the Iranians, they'll darn well deserve it because they wish to destroy us and all that is good.
An expert from a think tank is produced to say that the US military does not want war with Iran.
"The military is going to be cautious about going after Iranians in Iraq, operations on the border, or training camps in Iran itself ... I think they realize this could escalate. It's the kind of war the military itself doesn't want."
There you have it.
The US military is trying to avoid attacking Iran or Iranians, but it just might happen, anyway. Heck, at least they tried to stop it by being cautious. You know they'll go the last mile to head off war and there won't be any slip-ups.
DD blog gamed an "escalation" with the Revolutionary Guard a couple months ago. And we pointed to it earlier in the week here.
You'll need Point of Attack 2, an uncommon computer wargame, to duplicate the simulation.
What, don't you want to see how we take a stand against the new Hitler and his minions?
Everyone knows that America's officials and generals never dissemble when it comes to going to war.
In Cobra II, Michael Gordon's and Bernard Trainor's account of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, it is said on page 59:
"In late May, a reporter asked [Tommy Franks] how many troops he would need for an invasion of Iraq. 'That's a great question and one for which I don't have an answer because my boss has not yet asked me to put together a plan to do that..."
"...[For] Franks, even the cleverest hair-splitting could not reconcile his remarks at CENTCOM during the last six months," wrote Gordon and Trainor.
While cleaning out the garage this morning, DD came across "Operation Just Cause: The Storming of Panama" by Thomas Donnelly, Margaret Roth and Caleb Baker. On the back, Ralph Peters, author of the increasingly valuable and spellbinding book, "Red Army and the War in 2020," meted out some kudos.
The book's title -- what with the word "storming" and all -- made Ronald Reagan's little war against Manuel Noriega seem more stirring than it was. However, DD did not remember much of the book and in mistakenly believing it to be a good read, sat down to skim it for half an hour.
"At 1:03 AM on December 20, 1989, over 700 US Army Rangers descended onto Tocumen military airfield, near Panama City" -- and that was only the jacket copy. "[The Rangers] moved swiftly from the runway to the airfield terminal, overpowering entrenched defenses and taking 54 prisoners ... the first battle of Operation Just Cause had become a stunning victory!"
Wow!
Honestly though, "The Storming of Panama" was a real dud. There's no way to dress up anything about the US military crushing one of the nation's more pathetic and odious former toadies, one who fell out of favor in Panama.
However, "Operation Just Cause: The Storming of Panama" did contain one unintentionally hilarious part. Its final two paragraphs.
"Like it or not, Operation Just Cause gave soldiers a glimpse of what to expect if the military is to assume a greater role in post-combat civic action projects," wrote the authors.
"Not every people whose leader the United States seeks to overthrow will provide as friendly a laboratory as Panama did for training in stability operations. The job of rebuilding a larger or more hostile nation can only be more difficult."
" 'We need to put a lot of time and effort and resources into it,' says Lt. Col. Johnny Brooks, commander of the 4/17 Infantry. 'You need to expose your soldiers to as many situations as possible. It's a matter of education.' "
"Some chemical and biological agents can be manufactured in the home with items that can be purchased at a garden supply store," wrote the Houston Chronicle, about a week or so ago. "Law enforcement officials say they want to train first-responding officers to recognize that seemingly-innocent household products can be deadly when combined."
Remember readers, you can kill thousands with all those noxious plants, growth powders and slug baits sold down the street. Why do they even allow such stores to exist? Geez, it's a dangerous world.
Here.
"Unfortunately, on too many issues, some in Congress are behaving as if America is not at war," Bush said during a speech at the [far right] Heritage Foundation.
"This is no time for Congress to weaken the Department of Justice by denying it a strong and effective leader [who will allow to continue to torture prisoners by waterboarding them] ..." said Bush, as reported by the Associated Press today.
"Now we're at the start of a new century, and the same debate is once again unfolding, this time regarding my policy in the Middle East ... 'Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them. And the question is, will we listen?"
Whenever the horrendous administration of George W. Bush wishes to push the current war, pimp its methods, or lobby for a new war, Hitler is invoked.
If there is an enemy or future enemy of the United States, it is always compared to Hitler and Nazi Germany. And the Bush administration is the lonely Winston Churchill, warning that the new Mr. Hitlers -- last week, Iran and its leaders -- must not be appeased.
If you do not support George W. Bush's requests or landmine-masquerading-as-nominee-for-attorney-general, you are an appeaser in the war on terror and want the new Hitlers to win.
And you are probably trying to stab the country in the back right now. I know I am.
Glenn Greenwald regularly explains the practice. And here is one recent post.
Consigned to page A19 of today's Los Angeles Times, probably because it's no longer particularly newsy or surprising:
"Under siege in April 2006, when a series of retired generals denounced [Don Rumsfeld] and called for his resignation in newspaper op-ed pieces, Rumsfeld produced a memo after a conference call with military analysts. 'Talk about Somalia, the Philippines, etc. Make the American people realize they are surrounded in the world by violent extremists,' he wrote."
When it is time to whet the appetite for launching a sneak attack on a much smaller nation, many Americans now know that the much smaller nation must begin to appear regularly on the front pages of the daily newspaper. This is to prepare the polity with justifications for the potential sneak attack or trumped-up incident/circumstance used to preface the sneak attack.
"Wider Iranian threat feared," claimed the Los Angeles Times, above the fold, on Wednesday.
Iranians may seize diplomatic personnel, said anonymous officials to the LATimes. This raises "the danger of an escalation..."
"An on the ground clash could be sparked, say current and former officials, by a confronatation along the 900-mile-long border between Iran and Iraq, or in the waters of the Persian Gulf. Or it could be ignited over one of the periodic US attempts to arrest those members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps in Iraq."
Iran is itching for a fight. And when and if we smite the Iranians, they'll darn well deserve it because they wish to destroy us and all that is good.
An expert from a think tank is produced to say that the US military does not want war with Iran.
"The military is going to be cautious about going after Iranians in Iraq, operations on the border, or training camps in Iran itself ... I think they realize this could escalate. It's the kind of war the military itself doesn't want."
There you have it.
The US military is trying to avoid attacking Iran or Iranians, but it just might happen, anyway. Heck, at least they tried to stop it by being cautious. You know they'll go the last mile to head off war and there won't be any slip-ups.
DD blog gamed an "escalation" with the Revolutionary Guard a couple months ago. And we pointed to it earlier in the week here.
You'll need Point of Attack 2, an uncommon computer wargame, to duplicate the simulation.
What, don't you want to see how we take a stand against the new Hitler and his minions?
Everyone knows that America's officials and generals never dissemble when it comes to going to war.
In Cobra II, Michael Gordon's and Bernard Trainor's account of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, it is said on page 59:
"In late May, a reporter asked [Tommy Franks] how many troops he would need for an invasion of Iraq. 'That's a great question and one for which I don't have an answer because my boss has not yet asked me to put together a plan to do that..."
"...[For] Franks, even the cleverest hair-splitting could not reconcile his remarks at CENTCOM during the last six months," wrote Gordon and Trainor.
While cleaning out the garage this morning, DD came across "Operation Just Cause: The Storming of Panama" by Thomas Donnelly, Margaret Roth and Caleb Baker. On the back, Ralph Peters, author of the increasingly valuable and spellbinding book, "Red Army and the War in 2020," meted out some kudos.
The book's title -- what with the word "storming" and all -- made Ronald Reagan's little war against Manuel Noriega seem more stirring than it was. However, DD did not remember much of the book and in mistakenly believing it to be a good read, sat down to skim it for half an hour.
"At 1:03 AM on December 20, 1989, over 700 US Army Rangers descended onto Tocumen military airfield, near Panama City" -- and that was only the jacket copy. "[The Rangers] moved swiftly from the runway to the airfield terminal, overpowering entrenched defenses and taking 54 prisoners ... the first battle of Operation Just Cause had become a stunning victory!"
Wow!
Honestly though, "The Storming of Panama" was a real dud. There's no way to dress up anything about the US military crushing one of the nation's more pathetic and odious former toadies, one who fell out of favor in Panama.
However, "Operation Just Cause: The Storming of Panama" did contain one unintentionally hilarious part. Its final two paragraphs.
"Like it or not, Operation Just Cause gave soldiers a glimpse of what to expect if the military is to assume a greater role in post-combat civic action projects," wrote the authors.
"Not every people whose leader the United States seeks to overthrow will provide as friendly a laboratory as Panama did for training in stability operations. The job of rebuilding a larger or more hostile nation can only be more difficult."
" 'We need to put a lot of time and effort and resources into it,' says Lt. Col. Johnny Brooks, commander of the 4/17 Infantry. 'You need to expose your soldiers to as many situations as possible. It's a matter of education.' "
"Some chemical and biological agents can be manufactured in the home with items that can be purchased at a garden supply store," wrote the Houston Chronicle, about a week or so ago. "Law enforcement officials say they want to train first-responding officers to recognize that seemingly-innocent household products can be deadly when combined."
Remember readers, you can kill thousands with all those noxious plants, growth powders and slug baits sold down the street. Why do they even allow such stores to exist? Geez, it's a dangerous world.
Here.
posted by George Smith at 5:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home