Saturday, July 26, 2008

Pepe will have a conniption fit

US now winning Iraq war that seemed lost: Easy, Pepe, easy. Take some smelling salts.
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

13 comments:

Pepe le Pew said...

usama is in jail ? democracy is blooming in the middle east ? the price of oil has dropped ? Or has the definition of victory been conveniently changed to "we are temporarily taking less of a beating this year than last" ?

7/27/2008 11:40 AM
Tecumseh said...

Yeah, yeah, yeah. You're trying to squirm out of this, by changing the subject -- a tactic learned by pinkos in 1st grade. Doesn't work. I know you're cringing when you hear the words "US is winning" -- it's like incense before the devil (an old Romanian saying).

7/27/2008 4:46 PM
Tecumseh said...

Is this piece really from the Globe and Mall (Canuckia's version of the Gray Old Lady)?

It's strange to have to note this, but, he isn't yet president. He has absolutely no record at all of involvement in foreign policy.

Correction: He did offer unqualified, insistent opposition to the Petraeus surge in Iraq, which turned the war around to the point that some of its most relentless critics now maintain "it cannot be lost." In other words, on the one definitive issue, post-invasion, on his country's most important foreign involvement, the one decision the inarticulate and sublimely unhip Texan in the White House made alone, and got right, Mr. Obama was perfectly, publicly wrong.

There's very little wood - if you'll allow the metaphor - in that record, on which to build a podium to address Europe at a mass rally on your first visit to one of its ancient capitals. But Mr. Obama has self-confidence, he has sublime self-assurance. It's hardly more than two years ago that he was but a Chicago politician whose entire national resumé was a speech to John Kerry's nominating convention.

Ah, but he's a dyed-in-the-wool pinko, so that's enough of a qualification for Pepe & co. What else do you want?

7/27/2008 6:06 PM
Pepe le Pew said...

ai - argue on the merits rather than stating anti-pinko generalities (tactics learned by pinkos in first grade? come on).

You can't deny that the Grand Plan from 5 years ago which consisted in orchestrating a domino-efect democracy through the middle east has never close to materialized. There have been sporadic successes such as Libya (if you want to consider it that way) but we are far from the grandiose pre-war Morning Again in the Middle East vision.

Or do you consider that turning Iran and its wacky Mullahs into the most powerful arab nation in the Middle East victory?

Remember also Wofie's statements wrt the price of oil and the "wot" or should I dig it out for you?

You know the old Microsoft credo "it's not a bug, it's a feature" ? Can't win the war ? Redefine what winning means and you're done. (This is exactly how you convince yourself that the US "didn't lose in Vietnam", by the way.)

7/27/2008 7:53 PM
Tecumseh said...

Yep, the US Army did not lose in Vietnam -- there was even a Peace accord signed in Paris, if you recall. It was the pinkos and their allies in Congress who shilled for the North Vietnamese commies and allowed them to conquer South Vietnam a couple of years later, with the US Army forbidden from going back and stopping them.

Of course, the 60s lefties consider this to be their biggest victory -- to hand out 3 countries (SV, Laos and Cambodia) on a silver platter to the commies, after the US Army fought valiantly for a decade or so to stop commie expansion. And now, decades later, the lefties everywhere are salivating at the prospect of handing yet another victory to our enemies. So, OK, we did not achieve all our objectives -- shit happens, wars are messy, mistakes were made. It happens in all wars. But, by and large, the military did their job, killed a whole shitload of AQ and assorted baddies, and now Iraq has got a chance to get back on its feet after spending so many years under Chirac's buddy boot. Is that a reason to throw them to the wolves, the way the lefties did with the Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Laotians more than 30 years ago? Yes, says Obama, with hallelujas from Pepe. No, says I.

7/27/2008 8:41 PM
Pepe le Pew said...

AI, no matter what they do, you always think the "US army fights valiantly", even when they are dropping agent orange on villagers, butchering women and children, nuking civilians or firebombing them, they are the good guys. But I too used to hate it when data contradicted my theories.

7/27/2008 8:56 PM
Pepe le Pew said...

But back to the point, the war started off with a great lofty vision of democracy taking root (a convenient change of tack after the WMD fantasy collapsed). Instead, all you got for your trillion bucks was a couple of mid-level AQ operatives dead, a declawed dictator lynched and although there is still more AQ presence in Iraq today than there was before the war you call this "victory" ?
This is like saying that now that you've arrested a jay walker on 5th avenue, you've taken a decisive step against crime in NY.

7/27/2008 9:09 PM
Pepe le Pew said...

Is that a reason to throw them to the wolves
yup: iraq is already not worth a trillion bucks to me, and certainly not a blank check to top it.

7/27/2008 9:12 PM
Tecumseh said...

Hey, Pepe, your view of the US Army sounds exactly like that of Jean-Francois Kerry, in his testimony before Congress, back in 1971: They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country. Lefty urban legends never die...

As for the War in Iraq: we went there as a result of 9/11 (and to finish the job we didn't finish back in 1991). You don't measure the results against those lofty visions, but against reality. And the reality is that we are in a long war against a mortal foe, who has attacked us (and many others), and wants to destroy us. Stopping them in Iraq is an important battle in the wider war. But I don't expect an Obamaton to understand this...

7/27/2008 11:11 PM
Pepe le Pew said...

Agent Orange is a legend ? Read Griffith Jones' VietNam, inc (before Photoshop, btw).
My Lai is a legend ?
Il n'y a pire sourd qui ne veut entendre, mon cher.

7/28/2008 7:56 AM
Pepe le Pew said...

Here's some declassified info if you care to read. But you'd have to seek objectivity. Circulez, il n'y a rien a voir ?

7/28/2008 7:57 AM
Tecumseh said...

As I said, shit happens in every war. If you're a hard-core lefty, you'll carp on all the real and imaginary misdeeds the US Army did in Vietnam. But, by any historical and objective standard, those incidents such as My Lai were few and isolated, and in clear breach of official policy. The unspeakable horrors inflicted by the North Vietnamese (eg, their torturing of US prisoners at the Hanoi Hilton, with lefties like Jane Fonda ululating and goading on the tortionnaires) were a matter of state policy, and in the grand tradition of Commie ideology, of which present-day pinkos are the heirs to.

7/28/2008 11:10 AM
Pepe le Pew said...

That's my point - if misbehavior by american troops is not sufficient to qualify them as thugs, then what is? If the immutable premise is that they can do no wrong, then, they do no wrong.
Much of the "proofs" of the existence of god in my philosophy classes were built on a similar scheme, whereby, if you assume He exists, then you can prove he does indeed (but of course you need the premise for the demonstration).
Circularity - there just ain't nuthin' like it.

7/28/2008 11:05 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)