In an exchange with an MSNBC Military Analyst
Tfucker Carlson proceeded to toss a bucket-full of salt onto the tale of 7 members of the 82nd Airborne who published an Op-ed in the New York Times this week that completely eviscerated the claims of dog and pony pundits such as Micheal O'Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack.
Showing just how much he respects the troops opinion on how well the surge is working and how most Iraqis feel about it,
Tfucker claimed - "How the hell would (they) know?"
Before I get into the meat of this particular story, I just want to remind my gentle readers of why I call Carlson -
Tfucker. Besides the fact that it's funny, Carlson happens to be the son of one of the managers of the Scooter Libby defense fund and has stated - from his highly neutral position - that "the Plame Controversy is Bullshit".
MSNBC’s Tucker Carlson, whose father, Richard Carlson, is on the advisory committee of Scooter Libby’s legal defense fund, spoke to Salon today about Valerie Plame’s covert status: "CIA clearly didn’t really give a sh*t about keeping her identity secret if she’s going to work at f*cking Langley." Carlson then added "I call bullsh*t on that, I don’t care what they say,"
So it doesn't matter that Gen Hayden said she was covert, and that Patrick Fitzgerald said she was covert - and that Valerie herself testified under oath that she was covert. Carlson simply doesn't believe it. It's right there in front of his eyes - but he simply refuses to see it.
Yeah, so we now know how much we can trust his judgment and how much he respects the statements of those who have dedicated themselves to serving our country.
And of course, Tucker is now very concerned - like many of right-wing have suddenly become - that our military is becoming "politicized."
Tfucker: I'm uncomfortable with it since there has been this separation between active duty military and politics. That the service members kind of act out the policy of the U.S. Government - right or wrong - but they don't comment on it because you want civilian control of the military and that has always been our tradition and 2: I wonder if weighing in on a political question such as this doesn't squander the awesome moral authority that these guys already have.
When Sgt Aguina came to Yearlykos in full dress uniform and attempted to make statements that "The Surge is Working" - the right-wing was all in his corner.
Rick Moran on The Factor: He's a very earnest, very honest young man who takes the idea that "the surge is working" seriously.
Pajamas Media : He didn't say anything political.
So Aguina says the surge is working and he's not being political - but when 7 others point of the fact that it's not (which most of us who realized that Baghdad isn't in Al-Anbar province already knew) - they've crossed the line into politics?
Yeah, right - sure they did. Flip-Flop much?
Naturally Col Jacobs offered some "balance" to Carlson's statements.
Col. Jack Jacobs: I do think there is some detriment to the moral authority you're talking about. I think that these soldiers thought were performing a public service by making the public aware of what they see is happening at the lowest possible levels, but of course we only see a broad brush of the strategy, we don't see what happens tactically. So I think they thought they were performing a public service - and in a certain respect they are - don't forget now, that we're in an environment that you can get information in a wide variety of ways. No longer do you have to watch the news, or to you and me. (THANK GOD!) There are soldiers all the time, sending back dispatches from the forward edge of the battle area - on the net. Now it's difficult to police.
Jacob's doesn't make a ton of sense here unless you feel that those who gripe from the front-lines don't have valid points and even if they did, and they did, that it's a good thing censor them because it might "hurt morale" if people kinda like - knew the facts and stuff.
But actually, the military has been cracking down on military blogs for quite some time under the pretext that it has put operational security at risk even though an audit by the Army Web Risk Assessment Cell between January 2006 and January 2007 "suggests that official Defense Department websites post material far more potentially harmful than anything found on a individual’s blog."
Jacobs: The attitudes that we see in this op-ed piece may have been the same kinds of attitudes we might have had 40 years ago in Vietnam.
But you didn't hear about them 40-years ago, you're hearing them today because of the new methods of disseminating information.
Tfucker: Yeah, I'm not sure what to think - you see - like most Americans I instinctively respect those who are currently serving in a war zone, absolutely,
The way you've "respected" those working undercover on our national security? Yeah, ok.
Tfucker: and I'm not sure whether the surge is working or not. I honestly don't know and I'm not taking a position on that, I don't have the information,
Let me point out the when
Tfucker had Kenneth Pollack on his program to discuss How well the surge is working he spent most of the program defending him from "all those hysterical bloggers" who had viciously attacked Pollack for being - well - full of shit. Particularly some crazy guy by the name of Glenn Greenwald, who writes for that rag - y'know - Salon.com!
Being as sharp as a dull tack, O'Hanlon stated today that he thinks the 82nd Airborne Soldiers might have been taking a slight poke at him".
Hmm... like I said before - Ya think?
Personally I think it's more like a sharp stick in the eye, particular when O'Hanlon continues to claim that Iraqi civilian casualties are down - except that they're like - Not.
Oh, and how's that political reconciliation - which is just the reason we're staging the surge in the first place - coming along?
But I digress - back to
I instinctively distrust sentences like this - and this is from the Op-ed.
A vast majority of Iraqi's feel insecure and view us as an occupation force.
When the President uses phrases like that - "the vast majority of Iraqis (want this or don't want that)" - my first question is How the hell does he know, and that's my first thought here. These guys may be fighting the war but they don't have access to the "vast majority" of anybody in Iraq.
Jacobs: That's absolutely correct, they see the world through a straw - they see only what they see. You raise an important point, to what extent are we supposed to listen to anybodies estimate of what's going on?
"They only see what they see" - as opposed to those who only see what they want, eh?
When the President says just about anything - most of us are wondering "How the Hell Does HE Know?" too. But when it comes to our troops on the ground, those like these 7 who've just spent 15 months in Iraq - fighting the insurgents, fighting the Shia, fighting the Sunni, occasionally fighting a lone al-Qaeda straggler - who've worked side-by-side by side with Iraqi forces, and face-to-face with the Iraqi people day in and day out - call me crazy - but I tend to trust their judgment just a tad more than I'd trust
Tfucker's - or the Presidents.
What these 7 soldiers have done has been to catapult the propaganda and possibly give a little more perspective on the
Patreaus President's upcoming report puff piece on the Surge, which is supposed to be delivered to Congress on September 11th No Less.
These people truly have no shame. None. AT. ALL.