Skip to main content

This one came to me this morning from a retired Special Forces guy - a guy who told me back in '02, "I didn't vote for Bush.  I voted for the people he has on his team."  He still is a true believer.  An Afgan war vet, a mercernary, a contractor who has gone to Iraq several times, now.

The author of this piece forwarded to me put a lot of effort into this "piece".  Follow me over the cliff to read the whole thing...

The Postwest
A civilization that has become just a dream.

By Victor Davis Hanson

I recently had a dream that British marines fought back, like their forefathers of old, against criminals and pirates. When taken captive, they proved defiant in their silence. When released, they talked to the tabloids with restraint and dignity, and accepted no recompense.

I dreamed that a kindred German government, which best knew the wages of appeasement, cut-off all trade credits to the outlaw Iranian mullahs - even as the European Union joined the Americans in refusing commerce with this Holocaust-denying, anti-Semitic, and thuggish regime.

NATO countries would then warn Iran that their next unprovoked attack on a vessel of a member nation would incite the entire alliance against them in a response that truly would be of a "disproportionate" nature.

In this apparition of mine, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, in Syria at the time, would lecture the Assad regime that there would be consequences to its serial murdering of democratic reformers in Lebanon, to fomenting war with Israel by means of its surrogates, and to sending terrorists to destroy the nascent constitutional government in Iraq.

She would add that the United States could never be friends with an illegitimate dictatorship that does its best to destroy the only three democracies in the region. And then our speaker would explain to Iran that a U.S. Congresswoman would never detour to Tehran to dialogue with a renegade government that had utterly ignored U.N. non-proliferation mandates and daily had the blood of Americans on its hands.

Fellow Democrats like John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, and Harry Reid would add that, as defenders of the liberal tradition of the West, they were not about to call a retreat before extremist killers who behead and kidnap, who blow up children and threaten female reformers and religious minorities, and who have begun using poison gas, all in an effort to annihilate voices of tolerance in Iraq.

These Democrats would reiterate that they had not authorized a war to remove the psychopathic Saddam Hussein only to allow the hopeful country to be hijacked by equally vicious killers. And they would warn the world that their differences with the Bush administration, whatever they might be, pale in comparison to the shared American opposition to the efforts of al Qaeda, the Taliban, Syria, and Iran to kill any who would advocate freedom of the individual.

Those in Congress would not deny that Congress itself had voted for a war against Saddam on 23 counts - the vast majority of which had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction and remain as valid today as when they were approved in 2002.

Congressional Democrats would make clear that, while in the interests of peace they might wish to talk to Iran, they had no idea how to approach a regime that subsidizes Holocaust denial, threatens to wipe out Israel, defies the world in seeking nuclear weapons, trains terrorists to kill Americans in Iraq, engages in piracy and hostage taking, and butchers or incarcerates any of its own who question the regime.

In this dream, I heard our ex-presidents add to this chorus of war-time solidarity. Jimmy Carter reminded Americans that radical Islam had started in earnest on his watch, out of an endemic hatred of all things Western. I imagined him explaining that America began being called the "Great Satan" during the presidential tenure of a liberal pacifist, not a Texan conservative.

Bill Clinton would likewise add that he bombed Iraq, and Afghanistan, and East Africa without congressional or U.N. approval because of the need for unilateral action against serial terrorism and the efforts of radicals to obtain weapons of mass destruction.

George Bush Sr. would in turn lecture the media that it was once as furious at him for not removing Saddam as it is now furious at his son for doing so; that it was once as critical of him for sending too many troops to the Middle East as it is now critical of his son for sending too few; that it was once as hostile to the dictates of his excessively large coalition as it is now disparaging of his son's intolerably small alliance; that it was once as dismissive of his old concern about Iranian influence in Iraq as it is now aghast at his son's naiveté about Tehran's interest in absorbing southern Iraq; and that it was once as repulsed by his own cynical realism as it is now repulsed by his son's blinkered idealism.

I also dreamed that the British government only laughed at calls to curtail studies of the Holocaust in deference to radical Muslims, and instead repeatedly aired a documentary on its sole Victoria Cross winner in Iraq. The British, Danish, Dutch, French, German, Italian, and Spanish foreign ministers would collectively warn the radical Islamic world that there would be no more concessions to the pre-rational primeval mind, no more backpeddling and equivocating on rioting and threats over cartoons or operas or papal statements. There would be no more apologies about how the West need make amends for a hallowed tradition that started 2,500 years ago with classical Athens, led to the Italian Republics of the Renaissance, and inspired the liberal democracies that defeated fascism, Japanese militarism, Nazism, and Communist totalitarianism, and now are likewise poised to end radical Islamic fascism.

Europeans would advise their own Muslim immigrants, from London to Berlin, that the West, founded on principles of the Hellenic and European Enlightenments, and enriched by the Sermon on the Mount, had nothing to apologize for, now or in the future. Newcomers would either accept this revered culture of tolerance, assimilation, and equality of religions and the sexes - or return home to live under its antithesis of seventh-century Sharia law.

Media critics of the ongoing war might deplore our tactics, take issue with the strategy, and lament the failure to articulate our goals and values. But they would not stoop to the lies of "no blood for oil" - not when Iraqi petroleum is now at last under transparent auspices and bid on by non-American companies, even as the price skyrockets and American ships protect the vulnerable sea-lanes, ensuring life-saving commerce for all importing nations.

I also dreamed that no columnist, no talking head, no pundit would level the charge of "We took our eye off bin Laden in Afghanistan" when they themselves had no answer on how to reach al Qaedists inside nuclear Pakistan, a country ruled by a triangulating dictator and just one bullet away from an Islamic theocracy.

...

And then I woke up, remembering that the West of old lives only in dreams. Yes, the new religion of the post-Westerner is neither the Enlightenment nor Christianity, but the gospel of the Path of Least Resistance - one that must lead inevitably to gratification rather than sacrifice.

Once one understands this new creed, then all the surreal present at last makes sense: life in the contemporary West is so good, so free, so undemanding, that we will pay, say, and suffer almost anything to enjoy its uninterrupted continuance - and accordingly avoid almost any principled act that might endanger it.

Nice, eh?  I've yet to respond to him.  We've had relatively friendly disagreements up until last week, when he sent something that essentially blamed the Democrats for Bush's failure in Iraq and the state of this country.

Hit me with some zingers I can compile as a response, please.

Originally posted to Dem In VA on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 03:37 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  That's so wrong... (13+ / 0-)

    ....I don't even know where to begin. Okay, I do, on second thought. What I find particularly galling is the highly inappropriate comparisons to World War II. World War II is used as an excuse for pretty much any war of aggression, since it was allegedly "the Good War." It wasn't a good war, since there's no such thing- it was just more justified than most. But, as I see things, World War II was the exception that proves the rule that war is insane and evil. And another thing- the people who were most willing to find an accommodation with the Fascists and the Nazis were American and European conservatives, who saw them as a bulwark against communism. In fact, it was non-Nazi conservative and ultra-conservative elite in Europe who made up the bulk of the puppet governments in Nazi-occupied Europe. They lent credibility to Nazi rule in many countries.

    Bringing things to the modern day, comparing Saddam Hussein and Ahmadenijad to Hitler is abuse of history. Hitler pretty much openly threatened his neighbors and got what he wanted because he intimidated them. Saddam Hussein, by comparison, frightened no one, except for the people who had the least to fear from him: Americans. This is all thanks to ace reporters (read: Administration stenographers) like Judith Miller, who hyped a non-threat to America. Meanwhile, who else was scared by Saddam? No one. Not Israelis, not Syrians, not Jordanians, not Saudis, not Iranians, not Turks, not Kuwaitis. Ahmadenijad, meanwhile, has no actual power over foreign policy- it's the more reasonable Khameni who is in charge.

    Finally, while Islam is having cultural problems, now, it's also a series of cultures that has a rich intellectual tradition, so I think that if we stop interfering, things will turn out okay.

    Oh, and there is no such thing as "Islamic fascism." That is another abuse of language by neocons, who are smart enough to know better and evil enough not to care. It's propaganda, plain and simple. Are people like bin Laden threats? Sure, but they're more like an extremely violent and political version of the Mafia, rather than some sort of existential threat.

  •  I would tell the guy that (6+ / 0-)

    as an American I disagree with every thing he says and that he had been brainwashed to the enth degree and needs to seek some serious help. Now if you tell him that, his first responce will be anger and you will probably recieve some strong worded critizism.  Expect it. I would follow it up with the same reply.  I sent a friend an email back that she had sent me, and told her the e-mail was racist. I recieved an e-mail back and lets just say she wasn't happy. She has since calmed down but I planted a seed. Many times the first responce you get from the truth is anger and its that time that you know that you hit on a truth that person doesn't want to hear. It might take time but that truth will stay with them and pop up when you least expect it.

    "Though the Mills of the Gods grind slowly,Yet they grind exceeding small."

    by Owllwoman on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 04:08:12 AM PDT

  •  Tell him... (9+ / 0-)

    He has too much time on his hands. Most revisionists do. He should try reading history instead of writing it. Our Founding Fathers (remember them?) would sooner eat glass than build nations or engage in Holy War.

    No signature this cycle is as important as electing Larry Kissell to Congress.

    by RANT on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 04:16:44 AM PDT

  •  the Sermon on the Mount? (6+ / 0-)

    "Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit the Earth?"

    Point out the disparity between the Sermon and his hyper-aggressive foreign policy.

    Let's see...the Germans were correct about Iraq while the US wasn't.  Probably not a good time to lecture them about "appeasement", since most Germans these days view the US as more of a threat to international peace than Iran.  

    The British marines?  It's easy to say that they should have fought to the death.  But really, that's all it would have been.  

    Iran has the blood of Americans on its hands?  Well, that's news from any standpoint.  

    Calling Jimmy Carter a "liberal pacifist" is plain wrong on both accounts.  Carter actually served in the armed forces.  And he's only "liberal" compared to Bush.

    The people in Congress are pretty sure that they didn't declare war on Iraq.  An "authorization to use force" is not a "declaration of war".

    What's the point - this guy is hopeless.  He's drenched in propaganda and views everything in terms of "us vs. them".  

    "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it."--Mark Twain

    by RickD on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 04:18:13 AM PDT

  •  I'd tell him (4+ / 0-)

    that he needs some Ambien.

  •  I wouldn't even engage this (6+ / 0-)

    Were I in this position, I wouldn't even attempt to rationally engage this person. I'd probably say something like, "I'm sorry that you're so delusional. I'll pray for you."

  •  This is the Victor Davis Hanson who wrote (9+ / 0-)

    back in 2003:

    "I think Messrs. Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz, when this is all over, will have done a great favor to millions of Iraqis and provided Americans increased security, but I don’t expect that they will win any popularity contests for all their efforts.  Don’t expect that Walter Cronkite, Arthur Schlesinger, David Halberstam, Susan Sontag, and a host of others who predicted a nightmarish "hornet’s nest" and American diplomatic catastrophe in Iraq to admit their error. More likely, such critics will commit a trifecta of hubris and misjudgment by predicting further endless terror to complement their past gloomy prognostications about the Taliban and Saddamites."

    Just quote that back to your friend, and suggest that anyone who offered engaged in that kind of chest thumping back in 2003 who hasn't apologized for it in the interim, should receive no respect, not to mention credibility, for whatever he writes on the subject going forward - and anyone publishing or forwarding Hanson's ill-informed tripe should be embarrassed.

  •  even simpler: BUSH LOST THE WAR. (14+ / 0-)

    Bush fired the Generals such as Shinseki who were advising that greater troop strength was needed.

    Bush's people leaked a NOC and blew up HUMINT in the region.

    Bush's people leaked the Iran Crypto secret and blew up SIGINT in the region.

    Bush sends soldiers and Marines into battle with inadequate gear.  Body armor, vehicle armor, the whole nine yards.  

    Bush's DOD didn't take the IED threat seriously for over a year (I know this one first-hand because I worked on it at the time).

    Bush had a R Congress that gave him everything he wanted with no dissent.  Bush got everything he wanted.  

    And yet, years later, here we are with a loss on our hands.  

    What ever happened to "the buck stops here"?

    What ever happened to "It happened on my watch, sir"?

    All the ducking & weaseling in the world does no good: the blunt truth is that the Bush Administration had everything their way and ended up with a quagmire and a fiasco with no end in sight and no strategy.  

    Ask:  What's the strategy, and how do you know?  Ask: What are your own benchmarks for success, and how do you know?  

    And where is Bin Laden?  And what about all that opium being grown in Afghanistan, more than the total world demand this year?  And what about the Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan?  And what about the Afghani fighters being sent into Iraq to train?  

    Bush lost the war, period.  In fact, Bush lost TWO wars.

    A military commander who racks up losses like that is UNFIT for command.

    Let him try to argue that.  

  •  Yes, I dreamed that everyone should (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Fabian, Dem In VA, Dania Audax

    either simply shut up, or just agree with everything the Bush administration wants - no questions asked.

    Was he having these same dreams - dreams of everyone simply agreeing with the President - while Clinton was in the White House?

    I'm guessing - no.

    You don't know the REAL Homer! It's all burping and neglect! -- Bart Simpson

    by Pandoras Box on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 04:41:25 AM PDT

  •  When the premise is rotten (6+ / 0-)

    the most elegant logic can't save it. But you can never argue with it.

    The problem with literal, detail obsessed 'believers'
    is that they construct a circular, ideological universe
    to bend and shift as needed to consistently justify their
    arguments.  Catching your own shadow will be more successful
    than arguing with this guy, not because he's right,
    but because the 'ideal argument' from his ilk is one which can't be argued with.

    Listening is a weakness. An argument that can be broken is a sin. Compromise is evil.  His rationale for this type of thinking is that God Talks to Him.

    And he KNOWS God does not Talk To Us.

    He requires that exclusivisity to justify his existence,
    and so he'll never take off that 'body armor'.  

    If you had a third party to referee the conversation,
    you might pin him down. But I bet he's fighting for his life,
    and wouldn't know what to do if he let his guard down.

    He probably knows that what survived would have to become a Democrat. And since he's defined his Goodness by being a Not Democrat,
    he would probably melt.

    I hope he survives long enough to become de-fused.

    "The tendency to claim God as an ally for our partisan values and ends is the source of all religious fanaticism." ..... Reinhold Niebuhr

    by slowheels on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 04:46:41 AM PDT

  •  Send him a series of quotes (4+ / 0-)

    from before the invasion and after the invasion..the whole flowers and death throes stuff. Acknowledge that most of the people supported this war until it became increasingly clear (to many military people as well) the war was a lost cause. Either the mqajority of Americans are stupid or not. Of course he will say they are sheep of the media and then you can respond with the Pew study that shows media is more conservative than liberal. Not likely to convert much of the 20% Kool Aid drinkers at this point but what the heck

    •  Friedman got out of Iraq! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dem In VA, Dania Audax

      Even Friedman knows a losing battle when he sees it - eventually.  Friedman has dumped the Iraq Debacle in favor of Global Climate Change.

      Get this:
      Global Climate Change is more popular than the Iraq Debacle.

      We must never lose it, or sell it, or give it away. We must never let them take it from us.

      by Fabian on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 05:05:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  If he's so concerned about Pakistan (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dem In VA, Dania Audax, Pandoras Box

    Why does he support an administration that coddles them? And of course there's the coddling of the Saudi's as well.

    If evolution is outlawed, only outlaws will evolve.

    by jhecht on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 05:18:47 AM PDT

    •  It Sounds Better in the Original German... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pandoras Box

      as Molly Ivins used to say.

      --Lefty!!!

      "There is a time for compromise, and it is called 'Later'!"

      by LeftyLimblog on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 06:15:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Coddling (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Timbuk the Second

      Hanson is at least with it to understand that invading Pakistan right now would likely land nuclear weapons in the hands of Islamic radicals who would overthrow their leader post-haste.  Thus, better to speak with them rather than drop bombs.

      Now it's a simple matter of applying this rationality to Iran.  Sure, they don't have nukes now, but they have enough power to stop oil exports from the Gulf for the foreseeable future (post-war Iran would be virulently anti-Western, and citizens would need little prompting to take RPGs into their own hands), which is a lot more dangerous than a few mushroom clouds.

      It's not "coddling" or "appeasment" to avoid conflict with Iran, it's fucking self-preservation.  When an enemy has the upper hand (as Iran does), it's best to find a backdoor solution.  Military superiority, in the television age, don't mean shit.  He needs to grow up and get used to it.

      "It's time for you to turn off the TV and stop playing GameBoy, we've got work to do." -- Barack Hussein Obama

      by aeson on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 07:24:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Here's You Response - Bring Out The Wackos (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    arkdem, Dem In VA, Pandoras Box

    This is the GOP's secret according to Jack Abramoff, their favorite lobbiest, now in federal prison - They hate Christians, they laugh at Christians. They think all they have to do is talk about "life" and send some emails.

    "We want to bring out the wackos to vote against something," Abramoff's partner Michael Scanlon explained in a proposal to one Indian tribe. "The wackos get their information through the Christian right, Christian radio, mail, the Internet and telephone trees."

    http://www.salon.com/...

  •  Whenever a conservative talks about SACRIFICE... (4+ / 0-)

    I want to hurl.

    Hanson is just another chickenhawk blubbering about a lost era "when pride still mattered" and "our old LaSalle ran great."  

    What a jerk off.

    •  Chickenhawk (0+ / 0-)

      Hanson made his reputation writing about Spartans, Greeks and Persians.  He dreams of a better day closer along the lines of Spartan ethics.  In his mind, he is a soul brother of the Spartans.  In reality, he is a real desktop warrier that I doubt has ever smelled gunpowder.  In other words, a chickenhawk.

  •  Tell Him to Go Back to Sleep (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    arkdem, Dem In VA, Pandoras Box

    It was after he woke up that he went off the rails.

    I'm the person your mother warned you about.

    by Unique Material on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 05:41:58 AM PDT

  •  Ask him why (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dem In VA, Pandoras Box

    did his daddy and rummy put saddam into power in the first place?
    Ask him why did the repugs give bin laden authority?
    Ask him why did bush let the bin laden family memebers get on a fast plane outta here right after 9/11?
    Ask him why didn't repugs LET Clinton go after bin laden when eh wanted to?
    Why didn't bush head the warnings that bin laden wanted to get us?
    ect.ect. ect....

    (-7.50 -6.31) "Bush vows to de-fund troops in the field"-dday

    by arkdem on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 05:43:56 AM PDT

  •  Pretty simple (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dem In VA, Quicklund, Pandoras Box

    Nice, eh?  I've yet to respond to him.  We've had relatively friendly disagreements up until last week, when he sent something that essentially blamed the Democrats for Bush's failure in Iraq and the state of this country.

    Short and sweet...

    Say something "Don't blame others for your own fucking mistakes."

    It won't be a friendly disagreement, but it'll get the point across.

  •  Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    arlene

    Hoover Intitute.
    I have had this argument before. The emails usually are forwarded with 200 email addresses  and all of the headers BUT NO EXPLANATION OF WHERE IT CAME FROM.
    So 1. Ask "where did you get this" after the response ask "Where did that person get it."
    I know the answer but your friend most likely won't. this is a copy of a national review(online) article. you can fib and say you already read, and discounted it. or not.

    1. Tell your friend you disagree with treatises meant to mislead others, and to please not send any more.
    1. Make sure your friend knows YOU ARE NO LONGER GOING TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION. you can't change their mind. Can they change yours?

    Now, I just send a short note that says.
    I LOVE YOU BUT STOP SENDING ME THIS RIGHT WING BULLSHIT!
    Tell me how you are, tell me about the weather, tell me about your family. But no more chain letters.
    Love.

    Do you hear the people sing? Singing a song of angry men? It is the music of a people Who will not be slaves again!

    by axman on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 06:12:29 AM PDT

  •  one question: was it grape or cherry flavored? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pandoras Box

    nt

  •  VDH is channeling. . . (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Quicklund, Pandoras Box

    . . . Rudyard Kipling and a world where "take up the white man's burden" is no longer an appropriate foreign policy response.  What you might tell your friend is that warriors such as he wind up on the sharp end of the stick when politicians fail to do their jobs, just as ours have failed us.  In addition, the political leadership he follows has broken faith with those who are serving, but not caring for them when they return broken, watching over their families and making sure the mission makes sense.  

    Hope is not a plan.

    by JLowe on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 06:33:23 AM PDT

  •  One word: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pandoras Box

    Baaaaaaaa.

  •  Better Toss In (0+ / 0-)

    The American sailors on the Pueblo when it was taken, a US vessel, by North Korea in 1968.

    I get a kick out of those Wing People, as I call them, who are ready to sacrafice anyone else.  

    Any person who has actually been in combat, or engaged for whatever reason by the enemy, knows that surrender is the last option when all else fails.  If your surrender will not hurt the others in the area, and will ensure your people live, then you have to surrender.  Sure, you don't just throw in the towel when they start shooting.

    Something tells me that these people would be the first to shoot up the white flag if it were them.  Surrender is the commanders, or senior persons, judgement of the situation at the time.  Not a political statement, as they think it is.

  •  Vic (0+ / 0-)

    Strange, Victor Davis is a psuedonym used by Dave Sim, to house his thoughts on anti-feminism in his 300-issue comic book epic Cerebus.  

    Sim thinks women should not be allowed to vote, and was completely gung-ho about the Iraq war.  Though, strangely, his religion is a synthesis of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity, he has taken the most conservative parts of each to meld into his own brand of extremist anti-Enlightenment paranoia.

    Hanson, however, writes nothing like Sim (who in fact is quite talented), so I am more inclined to think that Sim swiped his name as an homage, rather than that Sim and Hanson are one and the same.  But the latter scenario is somewhat compelling, I have to admit.

    "It's time for you to turn off the TV and stop playing GameBoy, we've got work to do." -- Barack Hussein Obama

    by aeson on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 07:16:17 AM PDT

  •  You can't change the mind of someone... (0+ / 0-)

    who is apparently profiting from this war.

    Never argue with a man whose lifestyle and/or career depends on maintaining his beliefs. That's like arguing with a big Pharma lobbyist about letting Medicare negotiate for lower drug prices for seniors.

    Or you could argue with him just to practice your writing and debating skills and to clarify these issues in your own mind, but don't expect him to change his mind.

    "Never argue with a man whose job depends on not being convinced." -- H.L. Mencken

    •  My understanding is (0+ / 0-)

      VDH was lifted from some 3rd-tier college because his twisted historic "parallels" he coughs up caught the eye of Bush or some flunky.  Presto, he is elevated to some cushy think tank job.

      So yeah, this guy would be rotting in obscurity if he hadn't scored teh propaganda gig.  And that is where he is going straight back, the moment he stops hacking up gobs of propaganda such as this piece.

      "A Republic, if you can keep it". Ben Franklin 1787, regarding the new Constitution. "Challenge accepted." George W. Bush, Jan 20, 2001.

      by Quicklund on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 08:00:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Victor Davis Hansen - Oy (0+ / 0-)

    The guy is a hack.

    Just tell your pen pal that VDH did not write this; it is the work of an imposter.  You know thisbecause there the author does not draw any parallels between Iraq and the Pelopenisian War.  No VDH essay is penned without a reference to the Pelopenesian War.

    "A Republic, if you can keep it". Ben Franklin 1787, regarding the new Constitution. "Challenge accepted." George W. Bush, Jan 20, 2001.

    by Quicklund on Tue Apr 17, 2007 at 07:50:39 AM PDT

  •  What a piece of work! (0+ / 0-)

    In this apparition of mine, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, in Syria at the time, would lecture the Assad regime that there would be consequences to its serial murdering of democratic reformers in Lebanon, to fomenting war with Israel by means of its surrogates, and to sending terrorists to destroy the nascent constitutional government in Iraq.

    How the hell does he know that she didn't?

    Ideologues of any stripe who know how to string a few words together are famous for warping realities out of proportion, using careful language, in order to advance their agendas.

    Example...

    I also dreamed that no columnist, no talking head, no pundit would level the charge of "We took our eye off bin Laden in Afghanistan" when they themselves had no answer on how to reach al Qaedists inside nuclear Pakistan, a country ruled by a triangulating dictator and just one bullet away from an Islamic theocracy.

    "I have a dream.." - that's straight off Rev Dr Martin Luther King's plate - but in this case Hanson's covering over the shitpile left behind by the idiots who tried putting his particular brand of warped reality into action and found that it blew up in their faces.

    The only answer for the ideologue is to blame someone else.

  •  The word "oil" doesn't appear in that letter ... (0+ / 0-)

    The word "oil" doesn't appear in that letter, neither does "torture".  It takes a lot of nerve for someone who applauded Abu Ghraib to cite the Sermon on the Mount.  (see the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 21)  

    How can he claim to support Democracy, when western countries have repeatedly used violence to install cooperative dictators like the Shah of Iran?  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site