Join 3,564 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


How do you ask someone to be the 1,000th person to die for a mistake?
September 7, 2004 12:58 PM   Subscribe

How do you ask someone to be the 1,000th person to die for a mistake? Of course there are people who say the US Media is playing down the casualties. But why would a powerful country need to lie about its losses?
posted by jackspace (111 comments total)

 
This is a sad day for Hawks and Doves alike.

Support our troops: pray for peace.
posted by ilsa at 1:01 PM on September 7, 2004


this is probably very bad news for the 1,001st.
posted by quonsar at 1:05 PM on September 7, 2004


So will hurricane Ivan blow this off the headlines?

Or perhaps the latest on Kobi?

When will we "be allowed" see the awful reality of this war?

Is the mission accomplished yet?

Shall we issue yet another challenge of "bring it on?"

Will this validate yet again those convinced to vote for GWB?
posted by nofundy at 1:13 PM on September 7, 2004


Only a signs up for a volunteer military not believing he may be the 1000th. Or first.

In any case: the Iraq War was and is justified.
posted by ParisParamus at 1:13 PM on September 7, 2004


(oops: Only a fool...)
posted by ParisParamus at 1:16 PM on September 7, 2004


You don't ask. It just kind of, you know, happens.
posted by reklaw at 1:19 PM on September 7, 2004


In any case: the Iraq War was and is justified.

What number of American lives would it take before it was unjustified?
2000?
10,000?
100,000?
300,000,000?

Wait. There's not even 300 million Americans. So that's a good upper bound.

Obviously, there must be some number of dead soldiers past which the war would no longer be worth it.

What's the number, ParisParamus?
posted by sonofsamiam at 1:19 PM on September 7, 2004


Indecent haste much, Paris?
posted by Armitage Shanks at 1:20 PM on September 7, 2004


Also: it'd be nice if someone actually gave a shit about Iraqi casualties, too. But I guess Brave American Men and Women are more important than brown people.
posted by reklaw at 1:24 PM on September 7, 2004


ParisParamus - As a veteran of the first Gulf War (1st Armored Division, 6/6 Infantry), all I can say to you is I hope you one day understand what it's like to give your all for the profit of an elite few. Until then, shove it where the sun doesn't shine you ungrateful sloth.
posted by jackspace at 1:24 PM on September 7, 2004


In any case: the Iraq War was and is justified.

ParisParamus says it, it must be so! I don't know about you, but I'm relieved that we, after all this debate, have the final word on the validity of the justifications for this war. Now I can be comfortable and happy about it!

If only we could get techgnollogic in here to back that statement up with a quip about something totally unrelated, but utterly inflammatory-- then it'd be irrefutable!
posted by eyeballkid at 1:25 PM on September 7, 2004


American volunteer troops are an ideal gurkha army for PP's ideological peers.
And this single issue makes PP a solid Bushwhacker, all else does not matter.
posted by nofundy at 1:27 PM on September 7, 2004


In any case: the Iraq War was and is justified.

Because you say so I presume?
posted by clevershark at 1:27 PM on September 7, 2004


Is asking the 1000th any harder than the 1st?
posted by sexymofo at 1:29 PM on September 7, 2004


(oops: Only a fool...)

Oh, Paris, you don't need to sign the comments. Your username automatically shows up beneath them.
posted by soyjoy at 1:32 PM on September 7, 2004


Only a (fool) signs up for a volunteer military not believing he may be the 1000th. Or first.

Because our military has never recruited mainly to low-income minorities promising them a college education in exchange for a couple years of service, or a weekend a month, and would never run them into a war that was (despite PP musing) completely unjustified.

Only a fool. Yeah, but it is fools by design. Fools created by an American educational system that favors the rich white over the poor minorities. One where inner-city schools are neglected, and yes, breeding fools who can't tell where America is on the map, much less Iraq or Afghanistan, much less, like our president, be able to spell the latter.

Before we brand the fools of the volunteer army who don't know what they are getting themselves into, let's look at how they became fools in the first place.
posted by benjh at 1:34 PM on September 7, 2004


How many is the right amount? It will probably take another 500-1000 to get Iraq to the point where we can get out. And it will take several thousand more by the time Iran, North Korea and Syria are under control--better than 250,000, or 25 million dead with nuclear terrorism.

PS: over 40,000 die every year in auto accidents in the US.
posted by ParisParamus at 1:35 PM on September 7, 2004


How do you ask someone to be the 1,000th person to die for a mistake?

No one asked anyone to die. It is obtuse to put forward such a suggestion if you're looking for rational discourse. Unless of course, you just want to rehash the debate about the justification of the war. Which would be really boring at this point on this site.

the US Media is playing down the casualties

Wouldn't you expect the United States (or indeed any country in conflict) to "play down" their casualties? And do you really think that the war in Iraq has been ignored by the newspapers and magazines of record? Granted, not all "corporate" news sources can be the DU or daily KOS, but seriously now.

why would a powerful country need to lie about its losses?

Apparently their "lies" are working so well that the "big news network" got a whiff of the story. Not to mention the detailed stats at icasualties.org and us here at metafilter.

So to sum up the post, if I may - The Bush administration is sending people to die in Iraq, while they lie about the figures and the US media helps them do it. In support of this assertion, a summary of a Washington Monthly article via the big news network, and a link to detailed casualty figures in Iraq.

Your empty rhetoric is as annoying, misleading and unproductive as Zell Miller's or Rush Limbaugh. It does a disservice to all those that have died, and to those serious about discussing the nuances of the war in Iraq and the state of the world. Reality calls for more than vague innuendo and sloganeering.
posted by loquax at 1:37 PM on September 7, 2004


*giggles at soyjoy*
posted by dhoyt at 1:40 PM on September 7, 2004


You people are such assholes... soyjoy, jackspace, nofundy, reklaw, etc. You act like PP's position on this issue is new to you. He states an opinion and you insult him. Metafilter "doesn't do politics well" because of cocksuckers like you... soyjoy, jackspace, nofundy, reklaw, etc. Fuck you all.
posted by Witty at 1:41 PM on September 7, 2004


Before you reply to "Witty", keep in mind that it's probably not the user's main account. At this point, it might even be shared by multiple users.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 1:49 PM on September 7, 2004


Witty, indeed.
posted by Finder at 1:49 PM on September 7, 2004


perhaps in 30 years this will be big news, just as Vietnam seems to be overwhelming the campaign this time around...
posted by ZippityBuddha at 1:51 PM on September 7, 2004


Witty: where exactly did I say anything at all, insult or not, to ParisParamus?
posted by reklaw at 1:53 PM on September 7, 2004


In any case: the Iraq War was and is justified.

You're confusing the word justified with the word rationalized.

And it will take several thousand more by the time Iran, North Korea and Syria are under control

I know it would be crass of me to cross my fingers and hope you're one of them... but would it be too crass?
posted by dobbs at 1:58 PM on September 7, 2004


better than 250,000, or 25 million dead with nuclear terrorism.
Do you believe by going after those countries you have eliminated or reduced the threat of nuclear terrorism? If so, would you please elaborate on how you understand this would work?
posted by sequential at 1:59 PM on September 7, 2004


*sniff* Witty, you just lump me in with all those others... even reklaw???

I remember when I used to be your "boytoy"...
posted by soyjoy at 2:00 PM on September 7, 2004


Metafilter "doesn't do politics well" because of cocksuckers like you...

Yeah, if it were just for people with your erudition MeFi would be the picture of civility, I'm certain.
posted by clevershark at 2:00 PM on September 7, 2004


I'm waiting for PP and the gang to clamor for an invasion of Pakistan (the one-stop shop for rogue nukes) and Saudi Arabia (the most prolific source of Muslim extremism).

I'd better not hold my breath though, as Dubya designated those countries "allies".
posted by clevershark at 2:02 PM on September 7, 2004


Just keepin' it alive. :)

I have to say, when I was in Iraq, reading about people having real heated discussions (I recall one in particular where some guy in Chicago wearing a flag draped around his body at a protest was beaten by the 'what will the veterans think' crowd. I also remember writing back to several newspapers saying I, as a soldier serving in Iraq applauded the protester and felt I was fighting for the right of that person to express his views, including the wearing of the flag), nothing inspired me more than to see people actually LIVING the Bill of Rights. So whether I agree with you or not, I applaud you for speaking up.

Sometimes it seems someone makes a post here and all the "mefi-er than thou" crowd can summon is some sort of "you're not Metafiltering properly" diatribe. Is this really adding to the conversation?

In any case, I will soften my comment made earlier and instead say losing life or limb for something with more integrity, such as a duel at Mefi Corral's Free Speech Zone, would still be more blessed than giving the same to KBR and parents.

I applaud the range of opinion here. I just don't take kindly to having the people who are out there fighting back the edge of chaos so we can sit here and wrangle over what is right or wrong; be termed 'fools.' And so I registered my opinion on that statement.

<spankfilter=on>
posted by jackspace at 2:02 PM on September 7, 2004


Jackspace: As a veteran of the first Gulf War (1st Armored Division, 6/6 Infantry), all I can say to you is I hope you one day understand what it's like to give your all for the profit of an elite few.

Witty: Metafilter "doesn't do politics well" because of cocksuckers like you... soyjoy, jackspace, nofundy, reklaw, etc. Fuck you all.

I think a special term ought to be coined for Witty's response here: chutzpahcrisy: when you call a solider who's been in a war a cocksucker for disagreeing with someone's assertion that a particular war is just. See also: purple heart bandages.
posted by scody at 2:10 PM on September 7, 2004


chutzpahcrisy

scody, you just made my week.
posted by gwint at 2:20 PM on September 7, 2004


And it will take several thousand more by the time Iran, North Korea and Syria are under control--better than 250,000, or 25 million dead with nuclear terrorism.

If only Iraq were under control. If only Iraq being under control (which it's not) was a serious preventative to nuclear terrorism. (I strongly suggest at this point that you make your case, PP, because claiming it doesn't make it so). If only Paris didn't get a hard-on, and soil his shorts at his unbelievable nu-cu-lar snuff fantasies. Where do you get your projections, PP? I'd like to know where the figures come from.

I will give you this much; if we attack North Korea, the bodycount will, indeed, be at 6 figures. And most of those will be civilians in North Korea, South Korea, and Japan. Hows that price suit you, Paris? Is it worth it as long as long as you *feel* protected against the boogy man? Of course that small nuke that blows you screaming into hell could be carried and set by a white supremacist, or a Bath separatist, or a Filipino muslim, or even just a nutjob drubbed out of the US military who knows how to get around certain lax securities concerning our own arsenal of WMDs. How 'bout it Paris? How many do we have to kill before you feel safe? How many have to die in meaningless conflicts while you thump your chest and quiver inside, like the scared little child you are? "Please Daddy. Please kill the bad men before they hurt us!"

Yeah, but what the fuck. You can't make an omelette without breakin' a few eggs.
posted by Wulfgar! at 2:22 PM on September 7, 2004


The wrong fucking war in the wrong fucking place at the wrong fucking time....and young Americans continue to pay for the folly of our President:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - U.S. military deaths in the Iraq campaign passed 1,000 Tuesday, an Associated Press tally showed, as a spike in fighting with both Sunni and Shiite insurgents killed seven Americans in scattered clashes in the Baghdad area.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 2:24 PM on September 7, 2004


Interesting how you have free will to argue that Iraq is/was a mistake; my grandparents, who arrived poor at Ellis Island had free will to decide to come here, but a soldier, who is driving, perhaps a used Chevy or Dodge and isn't affluent, doesn't have the free will to decide to join the US Army or Marines.

Actually, I think your free will was taken from you at some University or college: some indoctrination process you participated in has caused you to believe that everyone who decides to join the armed services is really a stupid dupe, and only you can decide for him (or her) what's an appropriate level of risk to take in life.

I salute President Bush for having made difficult but necessary decisions. And I condemn you for (supposedly) being so principled that you will, I suspect, never find a scenario in which your supposed principles demand a war.

Who's really cynical?
posted by ParisParamus at 2:25 PM on September 7, 2004


everyone who decides to join the armed services is really a stupid dupe

I'd join the military if I hadn't seen Clinton's wagging the dog and Bush's greedy and incompetent cock-up.
I'd join if there was any evidence that the people in charge have any respect for their soldiers at all.
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:32 PM on September 7, 2004


One thousand wrongs.

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
posted by the fire you left me at 2:33 PM on September 7, 2004


The US death toll passes 1000, and right on cue here's Tom Ridge saying terrorists still hope to disrupt the U.S. democratic process, and Dick Cheney saying the US faces the threat of another terrorist attack if Kerry is elected.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:35 PM on September 7, 2004


And I condemn you for (supposedly) being so principled that you will, I suspect, never find a scenario in which your supposed principles demand a war.

Because as we all know, the only way principles can truly be challenged is in the heat of battle. I'm hard just thinking about it.

On preview: wow, the terrorist announcements really are that clunky and obvious, aren't they?
posted by solistrato at 2:40 PM on September 7, 2004


Dick Cheney saying the US faces the threat of another terrorist attack if Kerry is elected.

Yeah, 'cause we all know how the terrorists have kept to themselves during the Bush administration.
posted by clevershark at 2:41 PM on September 7, 2004


I look forward to many of you exploding when President Bush is reelected by a comfortable margin.
posted by ParisParamus at 2:41 PM on September 7, 2004


I strongly suggest at this point that you make your case, PP, because claiming it doesn't make it so

I repeat that, Paris, because you consistently avoid the point. Why was the invasion of Iraq necessary to avoid the holocaust you so fear? You're ever so definate in your opinion that certainly you must have a rational argument? Just present it, Paris. Come on, you're a big boy. Face the boogy man. Tell us what you believe about the situation, instead of what you believe about us. How has sacrifising 1000 lives in Iraq made us safe from nuclear terror?
posted by Wulfgar! at 2:42 PM on September 7, 2004


And I condemn you for (supposedly) being so principled that you will, I suspect, never find a scenario in which your supposed principles demand a war.

That's about as likely as you finding enough pluck to admit that Iraq was a horrible, horrible mistake.

So, which unit are you with? Being such a hawk you must surely be in the military in order to contribute what you can?
posted by clevershark at 2:42 PM on September 7, 2004


bush/cheney 04: clunky and obvious
posted by quonsar at 2:45 PM on September 7, 2004


And I condemn you for (supposedly) being so principled that you will, I suspect, never find a scenario in which your supposed principles demand a war.

Though I disagree, I think this is actually well said.

Though I should point out that no one chooses what wars they wish to fight if they're in the military. I do think that there are scenarios in which my principles would "demand" a war. It's just that this particular scenario isn't one of them.
posted by hoborg at 2:47 PM on September 7, 2004


Nope. I have no interest, and don't have the disposition to be a soldier. I pay my taxes, and vote. That's not enough for you?
posted by ParisParamus at 2:47 PM on September 7, 2004


Nope. I have no interest, and don't have the disposition to be a soldier.

Another fine trait PP shares with the hawks in the Bush administration.
posted by clevershark at 2:50 PM on September 7, 2004


Civilian deaths:













[ yeah, so just pretend there are 12,000 Xs here. ]
posted by Pretty_Generic at 2:50 PM on September 7, 2004


better than 250,000, or 25 million dead with nuclear terrorism.

I'm reminded of the bloody Soviet delusion that they could forceably bring equality to the entire world. I'm afraid any similar American program will end in a similar way.
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:50 PM on September 7, 2004


Yes, because as we all know, the US, especially under "Bush" is not better than the Soviet Union, Stalin, in particular.
posted by ParisParamus at 2:54 PM on September 7, 2004


And it will take several thousand more by the time Iran, North Korea and Syria are under control--better than 250,000, or 25 million dead with nuclear terrorism.

Y'know, Paris, here you make the leap that so many of your ilk make. I call bullshit.

In your world, if we don't take out Iran, North Korea and Syria, nuclear terrorism is inevitable.

I submit to you that nuclear terrorism may be inevitable even if we take out these regimes.

In fact, it's highly likely that those who would detonate a dirty bomb in the heart of [insert your town here] already have a leg up on the knowledge and possibly the materials, thanks to our dear allies the Pakistanis, or perhaps the Saudis.

So how, then, does taking out Iran or Syria stop them?

Answer: It doesn't.

Just a question: When the Soviet Union was still in existence, did you advocate for a full-our war so that millions massacred by a nuclear conflict might have been spared?
posted by kgasmart at 2:54 PM on September 7, 2004


Bush -= Reagan = Stalin = Hitler! IT'S SOOOOO OBVIOUS!
posted by ParisParamus at 2:54 PM on September 7, 2004


Bush -= Reagan = Stalin = Hitler! IT'S SOOOOO OBVIOUS!

Not at all. But according to your line of reasoning - "We have to wage pre-emptive war against all who might even think about striking at us" - then the United States should have taken a big swing at the Soviet Union - for who threatened us more?
posted by kgasmart at 2:57 PM on September 7, 2004


People, until Paris takes a stand on something other than his own bluster (like, presents some facts ... or even an argument) I would posit that discussing this with him is meaningless. You're trying to be reasonable with a person who's running around screaming "POOPY" at the top of his lungs.

If you wish to discuss with Paris concerning his viewpoints, pin him down regarding where those views come from.

Paris, I repeat the question: How does the invasion and occupation of Iraq make us safer from nuclear terrorism?
posted by Wulfgar! at 3:01 PM on September 7, 2004


I look forward to many of you exploding when President Bush is reelected by a comfortable margin.

Paris, I look forward to you spending the waning years of your life homeless and scraping for morsels of food on the street, since your retirement pension and life savings will be worthless, thanks to the 20% inflation caused by record deficits and economic mismanagement... when President Bush is reelected by a comfortable margin.
posted by BobFrapples at 3:03 PM on September 7, 2004


Yes, because as we all know, the US, especially under "Bush" is not better than the Soviet Union, Stalin, in particular.

Not at all true. Thank God I live in America. I'm a libertarian and a free marketeer. However, I realise that both free markets and socialist economies are alike in that they are equilibrium states, and simply assuming that removing the existing infrastructure of the economy will not necessarily cause the economy to move to either of those equilibriums.
What happened in Russia is that organized crime took over large parts of the economy. It looks to me like this will happen in Iraq, as well.

Both programs, the neo-cons' and the socialists (and that of the facists, and that of Sayyid Qutb, for that matter) can trace their intellectual roots to the Positivists. The idea that sociological constructs can be imposed on societies as easily as we impose railways on the earth is at the root of these programs.

I don't think Bush is comparable to Stalin. But their programs have a shared intellectual heritage and are similar in that they seek to impose a certain economic model on an environment that may not be able to support it. If we continue on the path you have endorsed, (25 million dead) then Bush would indeed be comparable to Stalin, in body count, if nothing else.
posted by sonofsamiam at 3:13 PM on September 7, 2004


Paris - "Actually, I think your free will was taken from you at some University or college . . ."

The steep cost of an undereducated populace speaks volumes does it not? Look Paris, with a short stint in the military, you too can afford to have your free will taken from you at 'some University or college.' But I guess it takes less sweat and less risk to let others do it for you while you judge them as fools.

I eat people like you for breakfast.
posted by jackspace at 3:28 PM on September 7, 2004


Karl Rove: "As people do better, they start voting like Republicans - unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing."
posted by jackspace at 3:50 PM on September 7, 2004


Oh, for another time, a distant field
And there a mortal warrior’s lonely grave
But duty charges me remain until
The end the last battle of the last war
Until that ‘morrow render unto me
That which is mine my stipend well deserved
The fairest flower of your progeny
Your sons, your daughters your hopes and your dreams
The cruel consequence of your conceit.

Steve Earle
posted by stonerose at 3:56 PM on September 7, 2004


Obviously, there must be some number of dead soldiers past which the war would no longer be worth it.

No comment on the current conflict, but this line of argument isn't going to get you anywhere. You dan't measure the worth of a war by how many lives are lost in fighting it. If a war is unjust, it is wrong for even the first person to die. In a just war, the correct number of casualties is however many are required to win.
posted by kindall at 4:28 PM on September 7, 2004


People, until Paris takes a stand on something other than his own bluster (like, presents some facts ... or even an argument)

I submit that this was true a long time ago and will likely remain true for the forseeable future. From what I've seen, the main reason you have never seen a coherent argument from him is that he is incapable of one and therefore must throw feces on others' arguments until evolution finally catches up with him.
posted by john at 4:37 PM on September 7, 2004


I look forward to many of you exploding when President Bush is reelected by a comfortable margin.

Since you already expressed your desire for hundreds of thousands of soldiers to get blown up for your fantasy future Iraq, this doesn't really suprise me.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 4:55 PM on September 7, 2004


What the fuck is it with people circlewanking to anti-intellectualism? How does being an uneducated boor make one superior to everybody else?
God forbid we develop critical thinking skills at school.
posted by casarkos at 4:57 PM on September 7, 2004


ParisParamus: bluster unemcumbered by the facts, reason or repect. But then, he does imply that he didn't get far in school...unless he lost his free will in the same class as Dubya at Yale?
posted by dash_slot- at 5:07 PM on September 7, 2004


But if Paris wasn't here, what would you talk about in this thread other than 'Ohhhhh, you are so right?'
posted by Lord Chancellor at 5:09 PM on September 7, 2004


Just a brief summary of Paris in this thread, in case you can't be bothered reading his drivel:

PP doesn't want people to be educated. He regards education as indoctrination (makes me think of certain other "PP" from Cambodia...)
PP calls people who join the millitary wanting an education "fools". It appears he feels the main way soldiers serve their country is by getting killed.
PP says a few hundred or a thousand more will need to die to stabilise Iraq - it's almost like he believes it's a blood sacrifice - the sacred blood of Americans falling on Iraqi soil willstop terrorism..
PP thinks war on Iran, Syria and North Korea will prevent nuclear holocaust.
PP reckons 40,000 die in road accidents every year in the US - I wonder if he feels equally comfortable using that number to justify not caring about the deaths of a few thousand New Yorkers a couple of years back.
posted by Jimbob at 5:23 PM on September 7, 2004


Lord Chancellor: " But if Paris wasn't here, what would you talk about in this thread other than 'Ohhhhh, you are so right?"

We could cover other issues:
- What's happening in the AIPAC investigation?
- What about the outing of Valerie Plame?
- Anthrax bomber?
- Osama been forgotten?
- over-time cancelled on millions of workers

And once we cover those, then I would head straight for the jugular.

But more importantly. we could finally get a good chuckle out of Arnold's gay porn connections.
posted by jackspace at 5:24 PM on September 7, 2004


scody - I didn't call jackspace a cocksucker for "disagreeing with someone's assertion that a particular war is just." I'm quite appreciative and grateful for jackspace's service, as I am with all members of the U.S. military. But that has nothing to do with it. Responding to PP with "until then, shove it where the sun doesn't shine you ungrateful sloth" was uncalled for and unprovoked. That's all. But it doesn't matter.

reklaw - My apologies... in case it matters at this point. I should not have included you in that list.
posted by Witty at 6:03 PM on September 7, 2004


Osama been forgotten?

Osama who?

/kidding
posted by clevershark at 6:08 PM on September 7, 2004


the only good thing -- really the only one, because it'll be a tragedy of unspeakable magnitude -- to come out of a soon-to-come new American adventure abroad -- to Iran, Syria, whatever -- is that the Pentagon is so stretched out already dealing with the Iraqi disaster that GW Bush (or, you know, President Jebby if the new war happens after 2008) will have to start, you know, actually drafting young Americans to go to slaughter abroad. it's clear that in a post-IraqAttaq America those foreigners who enrol looking for US citizenship and those Americans who enrol looking for a free college education and decent helath care are simply not enough to pad the Armed Forces and keep the Permament War going on indefinitely.

because the problem with permanent war, is that it needs a lot of fresh cannon fodder. and it'll need even more in the future, if Bush actually wins.

then, when the draft is back, we'll finally enjoy the spectacle of all those keyboard warriors whimpering for deferments (like their 5-deferments hero Dick Cheney), or running off to Commie Canada. all to avoid putting their jingo asses where their keyboards are. it's just so nice to send others to do the fighting -- and the dying -- for you.

unless of course the testosterone rush that they've been enjoying post-9/11 by fellating each other over the Internet is destined to wear off, sooner or later. then, they'll come back to their senses. maybe. who knows.
;)
posted by matteo at 6:18 PM on September 7, 2004


"it's clear that in a post-IraqAttaq America those foreigners who enlist looking for US citizenship "

my bad
posted by matteo at 6:23 PM on September 7, 2004


Witty, you're doing little at this point, save covering your ass.

I didn't call jackspace a cocksucker for "disagreeing with someone's assertion that a particular war is just." I'm quite appreciative and grateful for jackspace's service, as I am with all members of the U.S. military.


You wrote, people paid attention. Reread it, cupcake. You did indeed call jackspace an asshole and a cocksucker, just because he discounts the opinion of a person who won't even defend whatever position he pees in the snow that is MeFi. Respect military service? No. You're trying to cover your ass. and salvage any kind of credibility, in front of the betters who could smoke your opinion in their morning pipefull. 'Sorry, Witty. On this one, you lose. Perhaps you could join the Desert Storm non-Vets for Partisan Rants that Disrespect Those That Actually Served. I'm sure you'd fit right in.
posted by Wulfgar! at 6:31 PM on September 7, 2004


Oh, so jackspace served in a war and that makes immune to being called a cocksucker? Nah, I don't think so. Say what you want honeybun, I know why I called him what I did. I did so well aware of the fact that he is a vet, so I don't know what your point is. I'm not trying to salvage anything. I don't work like that. I say what I want, when I want, however I want. I apologize when I feel I need to, etc. I can be appreciative of a person's service, in whatever capacity, and still think he or she is an asshole or cocksucker.

The truth is, it's likely that jackspace, and even the rest of them for that matter (yourself included), aren't REALLY assholes or cocksuckers. You're just people like me, like PP, like everyone else. But in here, this thread, they're assholes and cocksuckers for continuing the hypocracy of this website. People aren't allowed to just say what they think and feel unless they're anti-Bush and/or anti-war. If they do open their mouth, they'd better be an expert in foriegn policy, global economics and international law in order to justify their position or it just isn't good enough for Mefi's left. Yet, all that's necessary for the majority of you is a silly quip about George or any emotionally charge condemnation of the Bush administration and you're in the club, one of the gang.

Sure, there are many contributors who have tons of links and facts about this and that, that help backup their position... and that's fantastic. But the majority don't, on both sides, and they should still be allowed to freely express their opinion unhindered and insult-free. But that doesn't hold true for people like PP or DD or any of the handful of minority viewpoints around here. They get blasted at the first mention of an unpopular position.

I read one thing in Meta and see the complete opposite in Mefi. You want civil? Then walk the walk. PP should do the same thing (which I don't think he failed to do here). Simply stating an opinion doesn't deserve what he consistantly gets in return. People should back up factual claims, yes. But opinions, from both sides, should be able to be expressed freely. Just as someone should be able to say, "the war is wrong" and get away with it, so should someone be able to say "the war is right" and leave it at that. If they want to take it further, fine. But they shouldn't have to fend off the initial insults first before defending or justifying their position. There are very few, if any, comments in this thread that are any more justified than PP's. I can count only a handful of supporting links. The rest are opinions. Yet somehow, PP deserves to be attacked and his comments ignored (which you called for)? That doesn't make sense to me. That's my beef, has been for a long time. I'm going to keep pointing it out when it happens. Fuck the grey. It's proven to be worthless in this matter.
posted by Witty at 7:23 PM on September 7, 2004


I am past convinced that the left is having a collective nervous breakdown. They are at the point of having to shoutdown anyone who disagrees with them at all. Just looking at the Metafilter posts on a daily basis convinces me that they are in the same position as religious fanatics: they must violently attack anyone outside their faith because they themselves doubt their faith.

Yes, the war in Iraq was, and is, a good thing.

Yes, the people we are fighting are terrorists, not "resistance", not "freedom fighters", and not "just defending their homeland."

Much of the left's support for radical Islamism is becoming firmly based in anti-Semitism.

For almost 100 years now, the far left has had a deep, abiding hatred of America.

The left was devastated at the fall of their precious Soviet Union, and bitterly hate Reagan for causing it.

And, last, but not least, the left have nothing left. No principals, no guiding ideology or ethos or morality. Nothing but bitter, burning hatred. And there is no future in that.

So go ahead, scream louder with each thorazine starved day that goes by. Rend your garments and throw ashes on your heads. Cut yourselves with knives in protest. Your world is collapsing in on itself. All is lost.

I breathlessly will ignore your rants. Lusers.
posted by kablam at 7:46 PM on September 7, 2004


I look forward to many of you exploding when President Bush is reelected by a comfortable margin.
posted by ParisParamus at 2:41 PM PST on September 7


To FBI - note how ParisPAramus wants to see Americans become human bombs.

Otherwise, why do you hate Americans so much you wish to see them blow themselves up, you American hater.
posted by rough ashlar at 7:55 PM on September 7, 2004


Witty: I'm quite appreciative and grateful for jackspace's service, as I am with all members of the U.S. military

Oh, that's right -- you were just outraged with the attacks on John Kerry's military record just a few weeks ago, weren't you? (Not to mention the attacks on Max Cleland in 2002 and John McCain in 2000.) Certainly, I remember now: the way you went out of your way to voice your deep and abiding respect for the military service of all veterans, be they liberal or conservative, was really quite moving. And here I was about to post that you're filled with such quantities of bullshit that it's a medical wonder you can even walk.

My bad.

On preview: Gee, I would've thought that Ann Coulter would have picked something more overtly referential to Senator McCarthy for her username, but I guess kablam is appropriate in its own way... the sweet, bewitching sound of a bomb blast, no doubt.
posted by scody at 7:58 PM on September 7, 2004


Sure, there are many contributors who have tons of links and facts about this and that, that help backup their position... and that's fantastic. But the majority don't, on both sides, and they should still be allowed to freely express their opinion unhindered and insult-free

No, they shouldn't. This isn't a place for any and all to chime in about how they feel on every issue. There are 17000+ members here, it would get too crowded if it were simply a place to 'express your opinion'. Here having links to back up your claim matters, links, and information, are our currency. So if all you do is post some stupid, inflammatory statement without being able to back it up, you're going to get called on it. If you want to be listened to, go find some links to better back up what you're trying to say.

Take kablam's last pot as the example of what not to do. He provides no backup for assertions about a war being justified, and goes on to hint that disagreeing with him makes you anti-semitic. Truly a stupid series of nonsense statements that aren't based on anything other than his own justifying of 1000 dead soldeirs and orders of magnitude more iraqis for a war for which there is on clear justification. Don't be like kablam.
posted by Space Coyote at 8:01 PM on September 7, 2004


In a just war, the correct number of casualties is however many are required to win.

What's the correct number of casualties required for an unwinnable war?
posted by soyjoy at 8:29 PM on September 7, 2004


No, the war in Iraq was, and is, a bad thing.

Yes, some of the people we are fighting are"resistance", "freedom fighters", and "defending their homeland", not just "terrorists."

Much of the right's support for radical neoconservatism is becoming firmly based in fascism.

For almost 100 years now, the far right has had a deep, abiding hatred of social progress.

The right was devastated at the fall of their precious Eisenhower era, and bitterly hate the left for causing it.

And, last, but not least, the right have nothing left. No principals [sic], no guiding ideology or ethos or morality. Nothing but bitter, burning hatred. And there is no future in that.

So go ahead, scream louder with each thorazine starved day that goes by. Rend your garments and throw ashes on your heads. Cut yourselves with knives in protest. Your world is collapsing in on itself. All is lost.

I breathlessly will ignore your rants. Lusers.


One worthless screed cancels out another.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 8:42 PM on September 7, 2004


Awww. I'm all nostalgic now. kablam, I haven't seen such a proud self-projecting deployment of the "feign condescending superiority" tactic since the great you-have-a-Sega-Genesis-and-I-don't debates of my middle school days.

I get really frustrated by random troll feed like PP's and Witty's "I choose to shit everywhere because I am angry about shitting everywhere" garbage, and then I read comments like yours- desperate, baselessly accusatory, blatant self-referencing opinions on one's own fears about the outcome of their chosen political viewpoints- and I find comfort in the fact that you know the exact same weight of jack shit about November than everyone else here does.

So thank you for that. Really. It reminds us all you're just like us, only more of an asshole about dealing with disagreement. Now, off to hating Reagan, America, and Jews at the Thorazine treatment facility. I'll kick some puppies on the way too.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 8:44 PM on September 7, 2004


No, they shouldn't. This isn't a place for any and all to chime in about how they feel on every issue.

MetaFilter: This isn't the place for your opinion.
posted by soulhuntre at 8:57 PM on September 7, 2004


What's the correct number of casualties required for an unwinnable war?

My point, since it must have sailed right by, was that you can't perform such calculations at all. They are meaningless even as hypotheticals. In any case, the U.S. hasn't been engaged in an unwinnable war since the Civil War -- and that was unwinnable only because we were fighting with ourselves, so we were bound to lose even if we won, and vice versa.
posted by kindall at 9:19 PM on September 7, 2004


Iraq makes us safer, at the very least, because, in addition to erasing Iraq-originating terrorism, it sends a message to the other half dozen, or so terrorist states that the fun and games are over, from North Korea through Libya.

Of course, the same people who find this preposterous find it preposterous that Rudy Guiliani's policing tactics saved NYC, but it's the same idea: the impunity is over; Arafat you will be a dead man; Syria, YOU'RE NEXT!
posted by ParisParamus at 9:42 PM on September 7, 2004


unwinnamable
posted by soyjoy at 9:56 PM on September 7, 2004


"We have to wage pre-emptive war against all who might even think about striking at us"

No. How about threats, plus demonstrated ability? That's how "attempted murder" or conspiracy works, and the results have not been horrid.
posted by ParisParamus at 9:57 PM on September 7, 2004


Iraq makes us safer, at the very least, because, in addition to erasing Iraq-originating terrorism,

Which terrorism would that be? None? And now there is terrorism in Iraq? So essentially the opposite of what you claim has actually occurred.

0/1

it sends a message to the other half dozen, or so terrorist states that the fun and games are over, from North Korea through Libya.

North Korea's resumption of its nuclear weapons program has set its neighbors and much of the rest of the world on edge.

Paramus: 0/2

Of course, the same people who find this preposterous find it preposterous that Rudy Guiliani's policing tactics saved NYC

Source for this statement seems to be paramus' ass.

Paramus: 0/3

Arafat you will be a dead man; Syria, YOU'RE NEXT!

Bush/Cheney '04: No soldier left alive.
posted by Space Coyote at 9:58 PM on September 7, 2004


Yes, I know, he flip-flopped the next day. Shhhh.
posted by soyjoy at 10:01 PM on September 7, 2004


No. How about threats, plus demonstrated ability?

" 2001: Powell & Rice Declare Iraq Has No WMD and Is Not a Threat"

That's how "attempted murder" or conspiracy works

No, for the attempted murder analogy, he would have had to hvae launched a missile at the US which didn't end up hitting anything.

and the results have not been horrid
posted by Space Coyote at 10:06 PM on September 7, 2004


Has Kerry forfeited yet? Perhaps, just perhaps, if so many of you Left-of-Sanity people hadn't spent so much time with Ralphie boy, and hadn't spent the First and Second Innings supporting Dean, you might have found a candidate who could beat Bush (and actually, I might have voted for him).
posted by ParisParamus at 10:10 PM on September 7, 2004


Space Coyote: you obviously don't have a law degree.
posted by ParisParamus at 10:14 PM on September 7, 2004


Has Kerry forfeited yet?

Don't give too much credence to flimsey polling.

"The Zogby poll for the same Aug 30 - Sept 2nd time frame showed Bush up 48-46% over Kerry."
Zogby's methodology
posted by Space Coyote at 10:20 PM on September 7, 2004


Has Kerry forfeited yet?

He says he hopes to get the troops out of Iraq by the end of his first term.

Oh, you mean the election...
posted by techgnollogic at 10:21 PM on September 7, 2004


Paris' arguments before the bar in an attempted murder case:

"your honour, while it's true that the accused had no weapon, no motive, and no opportunity, that the alleged victim was under no threat from the accused, and that the would-be victim has been demonstrated to be making false accusations about te accused for years, we still recommend the death penalty."
posted by Space Coyote at 10:23 PM on September 7, 2004


Have you thought it through that we're (yeah, the USA, which includes many of us here . . . and you and I) essentially just creating the next generation of terrorists? Have you ever thought about the fact that during the Cold War, the Warsaw Pact kept NATO in business?

What kind of world do you want to live in? Do you think we can sustain our society by becoming ever more fearful of the world around us, a la Israel? (By the way, my Grandfather spent three years in a concentration camp during WWII but I still think Israel's current power base is leading it into more and more dangerous waters, destabilizing the region and growing parts of the world with short-sighted self-righteous raids that never seem to quite get all of the 'terrorists.')

Do you realize they actually teach policy to up and coming leaders in the military so we can win the hearts and minds without so much as drawing a sword? Ever think about the fact that the best way to win a war is to not start one in the first place?

Ever think of how much cheaper it would have been to put our efforts into economic development of these nations through strong-willed but human-faced diplomacy? How about energy development instead of weapons proliferation?

When you make these shortcuts to thinking by grouping everyone who has spoken out against Bush into neat little categories such as 'commie' or 'liberal' or whatever, you're neglecting the enormous numbers of people who, although normally quite conservative, are now voting for someone like John Kerry.

You have your radical evangelical President G.W. Bush to thank for helping us 'liberals' get something of a coalition going.

But the big tragedy is you somehow think that killing someone is going to keep his kid from growing up to avenge violence perpetrated upon their family and land. When you take away HOPE from people, what else do they have to LIVE for? In their desperate situation, they aren't thinking about how they can take away your Social Security. They're thinking about how to draw as much blood so they can get you to loosen the noose you have around their neck. What would YOU do in their situation?

And it is all of US who will have to pay for this with our blood, sweat and tears.

Get some rest, while you still can.
posted by jackspace at 10:52 PM on September 7, 2004


But the big tragedy is you somehow think that killing someone is going to keep his kid from growing up to avenge violence perpetrated upon their family

You're not saying that killing someone is necessarily going to cause his kid to grow up wanting to avenge his father, are you?
posted by techgnollogic at 11:09 PM on September 7, 2004


You're not saying that killing someone is necessarily going to cause his kid to grow up wanting to avenge his father, are you?

No, he's saying that doing that to tens of thousands of people makes it likely that a fair few of their kids just might.

Oh, I'm sorry, was that nuance again?
posted by Space Coyote at 11:12 PM on September 7, 2004






U.S. Conceding Rebels Control Regions of Iraq

Shiite support eludes new Iraqi government

A week after reaching a truce with Moktada al-Sadr's rebel militia, a move officials hailed as a breakthrough that would let them bolster security forces and restart reconstruction projects, the interim Iraqi government faces a deepening crisis of confidence among the country's Shiite Muslim majority.

As American military deaths in Iraq operations surpassed the 1,000 mark, top Pentagon officials said Tuesday that insurgents controlled important parts of central Iraq and that it was unclear when American and Iraqi forces would be able to secure those areas.

The unwinnable war

War is an abstraction in the American imagination. It lives there, cloaked in glory, as an emblem of patriotism. We show our love for our country by sending our troops abroad and then "supporting" them, no matter what. When images appear that contradict the high-flown rhetoric of war -- whether of young GIs disgracefully humiliating Iraqi prisoners or of a devastated holy city where vast fields of American-created rubble surround a shrine -- we simply do not take them in as real. Thinking of ourselves as only motivated by good intentions, we cannot fathom the possibility that we have demonized an innocent people, that what we are doing is murder on a vast scale.

There is the single most troubling aspect of the war in Iraq. We launched it against the wicked Saddam Hussein, yet the majority of so-called "insurgents" against whom our forces are arrayed hated Hussein more than we did. We are killing people by the thousands who threaten absolutely nothing of ours.

posted by y2karl at 11:16 PM on September 7, 2004


you will, I suspect, never find a scenario in which your supposed principles demand a war.

I've been calling for invasion and occupation of America for years.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:23 PM on September 7, 2004


Well look at what George H.W. Bush's kid did to try and avenge the assassination attempt on his old man.

This latest insurgency started because we tried shutting down a newspaper run by a cleric whose father was killed by Saddam. Another potential ally turned-foe.
posted by jackspace at 12:02 AM on September 8, 2004


This latest insurgency started because we tried shutting down a newspaper run by a cleric whose father was killed by Saddam. Another potential ally turned-foe.

You weren't reading his newspaper much, were you? Not much of a "potential ally" there, I'm afraid.

I've been calling for invasion and occupation of America for years.


You might get your chance, stav, after American troop re-alignment leaves your country vulnerable to the deranged psychopath to the north. Of course, you'll be invading as a North Korean whose life was spared only because he swore allegiance to the communist party and joined the army, but hey. . .
keep rubbing that monkey's paw, tough guy.
posted by David Dark at 1:47 AM on September 8, 2004


Well, I'm a Canuck, DD, so I reckon they'd probably haul me off to the English Mines or something, rather than put me on the front lines.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:49 AM on September 8, 2004


Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of disappointed shells that dropped behind.

GAS! Gas! Quick, boys!-- An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling
And floundering like a man in fire or lime.--
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.

In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.

If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,--
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.


-Wilfred Owen, 1917
I guess there are some lessons that need to be relearned, to the annoyance of some and regret of most.
posted by GhostintheMachine at 4:29 AM on September 8, 2004


Being called ugly names by the likes of half-Witty is to be worn as a badge of honor. Thank you half-Witty for the unintended compliment.

There is no loss of soldier's lives too high, no price in treasure too much for America to pay as the loyal Gurkhas in service to the Paramus Likudniks. We must give all in service to the wingnuts of Israel, violent confrontation being the coin of their realm.

Paramus is stating a position that is not in the best interests of America but do serve the interests of the Likudniks very well. What happens to the US and its citizens is secondary.
posted by nofundy at 6:35 AM on September 8, 2004


Missing in Action
posted by homunculus at 9:25 AM on September 8, 2004


David Dark - "You weren't reading his newspaper much, were you? Not much of a "potential ally" there, I'm afraid."

Moqtada al-Sadr
would just be another windbag if he didn't have an occupying force to unite his followers against in the first place. However, I will grant that the guy did incite violence in his newspaper against the occupiers/liberators.

Ever read any of the early American newspapers?
posted by jackspace at 9:27 AM on September 8, 2004


Being called ugly names by the likes of half-Witty is to be worn as a badge of honor.

From this day forward, I shall call you Dump Pumper.
{presents crown}
posted by Witty at 10:42 AM on September 8, 2004


You know what? I've changed my mind. I think I'll vote for Kerry.
posted by ParisParamus at 11:49 AM on September 8, 2004


Lest any of you not know: This is Paramus
posted by ParisParamus at 11:53 AM on September 8, 2004


So you HAVE been to a combat zone! :)

That's actually a great part of the country. I wonder what your views on pollution regulation are. When I was a kid, we used to go to Washington's Crossing and go inner-tubing. Do folks still do that there?
posted by jackspace at 12:39 PM on September 8, 2004


Huh? Washington's Crossing? Isn't that on the Delaware?
posted by ParisParamus at 12:40 PM on September 8, 2004


Doh! You got me. Sorry, I was a South Jersey kid. :)
posted by jackspace at 12:46 PM on September 8, 2004


« Older politics.slashdot.org...  |  Lift & separate.... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments