Memorial Day
Many more talented writers than I have composed beautiful tributes all over the net to our soldiers and veterans.
I am not a great talent but I am no less thankful to the sacrifices made by these great men and women. So, on this Memorial Day, I will simply say...
Thank You to all of those currently serving and all the veterans from years past. Thank you for believing that our way of life is/was worth defending.
Posted by Rosemary on
05.28.2007
R.I.P. Steven Malcolm Anderson
Minion
of the Week
I notice that over on Dean's blog that he likes the idea of sending US tanks to depose the current Sudanese president. Is he unaware that the rebel forces being fought by the Sudanese government (JEM) are radical Islamists, and deposing al Bashir would likely result in Hassan al-Turabi taking power? Or is he in favor of an even more extremist form of Sharia being imposed on Darfur?
M. Barrette says, in response to my remark:Except that Hassan al-Turabi, who is a powerful figure in Sudan and who is closely associated with the rebels (JEM) is the person who invited bin Laden to the Sudan in the first place, and even married one of his nieces to bin Laden.
This is fun.
That was Ara. Mine was saying that the Canadian health care system didn't suck. Mark at the same time for just being Mark, I think.
Dean is stubborn.
He's said a couple of times that he'd let anyone he kicked back on under certain circumstances, but I'm not that interested.
As for you, you seem to honestly believe you got banned for defending CanadaCare? Whatever. You got banned for what I found to be a string of insulting and, more importantly, threadjacking comments, and finally one day you called me a "market ideologue" for saying I wanted a national health insurance system for America but one that was competitive and not single payer like Canada because of the problems inherent in Canada's system. I'm fine to treat that as water under the bridge, but don't live under the delusion that everything was all great until one day you defended Single Payer in an ultra-rational manner and big bad Dean was mean and irrational. I'd had enough of your general dickyness on that and other subjects and decided you could go play somewhere else.
As to the situation in Sudan: yes well it's all well and good to say X Y or Z has backfired in the past, when you have no good solution to offer of your own. Which is what I find is typical of so many people who think they're being smart: telling us what could go wrong. Well no shit, EVERYTHING that might be tried has backfired in the past. What's obviously backfiring horribly right now is the bullshit handwringing and bashing of the current political class while people are being raped and mutilated and murdered.
I'd rather send in UN peacekeepers by force, and forcibly remove those who are getting in the way. Since everything else that's been tried has obviously backfired horribly, it seems a good idea to me.
But hey, violence never solved anything, right?
Yes I still despise the UN. If we had a worldwide league of democracies to do things like this it would be much much better. But as Rumsfeld so eloquently (and 100% correctly) said, you go to war with the army you have. The UN's the closest thing we have to legitimacy in the region right now.
Pragmatism isn't pretty.
In other news: Michael Moore is fat.
Dean is an authoritarian, i.e., his rule needs to rule. Rosemary keeps a level playing field, which is why "intelligent posters" (and the rest of us) like playing here.
More on topic, I hope that everyone - especially the war supporters - watches the News Hour. At least the last five minutes, to face the faces, names, ages and home towns of those who who have sacrificed everything.
Cite please. I don't recall ever saying any such thing. I'm not even familiar with the phrase.
You got banned for what I found to be a string of insulting and, more importantly, threadjacking comments...
I'd be eager to see even one of these linked to.
I'd rather send in UN peacekeepers by force, and forcibly remove those who are getting in the way.
That might be okay with me too under certain circumstances and conditions, although there's a serious risk that both sides of the conflict would then unite against the UN and it would turn into another Iraq.
However, putting pressure on China might be a better route, as they have a great deal of influence with Sudan. Another approach might be to make it clear to the rebels that they will get no support. In other words, taking the pressure off the Sudanese government might well get JEM back to the bargaining table. It should be remembered that the head of the SLA is now running Darfur. Not bad for a guy that was shooting at Sudanese troops a year ago.
Um, due to Republican fiscal policy (so to speak), we really don't have the means to bring much pressure to bear on the Chinese. Perhaps you Canadians could help us out.
There's a difference between Moslems, whom I'm not at war with just because they are Moslems, and ragheads, who show me an attitude I just don't like.
Now I happen to be a culturalist, not a racist. (If you don't know what I'm talking about, then you couldn't begin to understand me or what I'm driving at.) Which means that I sincerely think that people can change their attitude and even re-adapt their particular part of their culture. Japanese have done all that en-masse, more than once. Others have done it in little groups, depending on their perceived needs.
So if an arab Moslem -- or moslem Arab, if that's a better designation -- wants to be an American, and wants to expend his time, money and energy on making a major effort to remake his or her self for purposes of accomplishing that, then I not only have no problem with it, but I cheer on such people. Chances are they might make become better Americans than I am.
Now about this business in Darfur. Yes, I know we may accomplish little or nothing by involving ourselves in that faraway place. And maybe I'm crazy for saying this. But there's a little part of me which remainds me that the willingness of the American nation to send its sons to such distant places -- and now their daughters too -- is one of the aspects to our culture that made us a great nation. And maybe I shouldn't be too cynical about all this, and be too quick to write it all off.
And you know something, DPU? I really want to see the United States win this civil war in Iraq. Not just for the Iraqis. Not just for the oil. Not justfor the Kurds, who I favor over the Arabs, but for the United States of America. We picked up our marbles and ran away from Viet Nam in 1975, and left a lot of people dangling there. I want not to see that happen again.
I don't know why in hell Dean banned you. But it's his blogsite. And if he really wanted to, I suppose he could ban Rosie as well. He sure as hell could ban me.
But in the meantime, Rosie lets you rant. And that's pretty nice, because she's got a good site here. Treat her well.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
Really, Arnold. Many nations, or should I say the rulers of many nations, have been willing to send the sons of others to distant places for the most ignoble of reasons (the "nations" often never knew the actual reasons). It often made them powerful but not great, in the moral sense of the word.
It only matters why. And "the nation" didn't go there to bring them freedom, democracy or civil order, remember? Something about 9/11 and a "mushroom cloud" as I recall. And there's nothing great about gullibility.
Maybe we are or are not bringing them freedom and democracy. (We sure as hell are bringing them civil order.) But that doesn't mean we can just pick up bag and baggage and bug out of there.
I don't think the anybody had in mind making us any greater or more powerful by attempting to bring democracy and western-style freedom to a land such as Iraq. Maybe our whole effort is doomed to be a repeat of Viet Nam. But I think we should be very careful not to pick up and run from this particular challenge.
And something tells me that no matter who is elected president next year, we won't be leaving Iraq the same way we left Saigon in April 1975.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb wI
Shep: You would know from authoritarianism? With all your ranting about rethuglicans and brown shirts?
Stu/DPU: I have no interest in dredging up 4 year old links just to satisfy you. You go on and keep telling everybody I banned you for the sin of defending CanadaCare. It's working well for you. There's no chance you got obnoxious about it or insulted your host one too many times.
In any case, you got your answer.
Whatever. I just checked the conversations, and you called yourself a "market ideologue" in it, not me. I've long suspected an active internal dialog in you, Dean. This confirms it.
The sad thing is that you can't tell it's an internal dialog, and then you shit over people in the real world for it.
As I said at the time, your blog, your rules. But you're out-and-out lying about what I said.
Not that it matters.
The funny thing is, the way I got banned is, Dean wrote a post basically encouraging his readers to attack me with political namecalling. I responded to one commenter with what I thought was admirable restraint, considering the situation. Because of this and other exchanges, I e-mailed Dean privately and asked if I had behaved badly in any way on his site, and he said no. Right after that reply, he wrote publicly on his site that I was a "dishonest" "attack artist" without giving a single example, and then banned me.
But as ++- so eloquently put it, the truth rarely matters these days.
"Fuck you, you ignorant, ungrateful, bigoted piece of Canuck shit."
Projection is indeed a bitch.
Mostly I blame Rosemary for all of Dean's problems. Everyone should know by now NEVER to get involved with an evil conservative Queen (except Andrew Sullivan).
I would say that frequent amounts of masturbation would help, but now that you're catholic, it's a moot point.
We need to start over with a group hug and have a Dean's world conference....in Hawaii so fucking Kevin D would not attend.
There's only one commentator I've dealt with on either blog that I cannot stomach. Can you guess who that is? 1 million points to the winner.....
Probably only Rosemary can get this one....hint: you blogroll this person.
hahhahahahahahaha............
My guess is Rhianna.
Our President got the office but “duly-elected” is a stretch in my book. Same for ruling within his “constitutionally defined prerogatives.”
As I said, “nations” often don’t know the reasons. Considering how many of the public reasons have proved false, how would you know what the real reasons are? Hint: the Wolfowitz and Bush Doctrines are all about the projection of US power and global hegemony.
I agree that we won’t be leaving Iraq any time soon. Strategically, that clusterf*ck makes Vietnam look like Grenada. Wake me when we’ve established something resembling civil order – if I’m still alive.
Dean: Never used either term myself (paranoia is a common attribute among authoritarians). But, if the shirt fits…
As I said, there's a rich mental dialog going on there. Dean keeps attributing to others what he hears in his own inner debates. He's debating wild-eyed raving moonbats in his head.
On the plus side, he can alway win those debates. On the negative side, he's beginning to look like a loon.
We all say a lot of nasty things in the heat of anger. On a normal day, Dean doesn't think you are a piece of Canuck shit, he really does think you are a thoughtful guy. He even asked me if he answered your questions fully on Darfur and I told him to read this thread. Perhaps, I should have just said "pretty much". ;-)
I don't know if "we all" say "a lot" of nasty things in the heat of anger. But those who do might want to think twice before they accuse others of constant "ad hominem and abusive language" without a shred of proof.
"Ya got me wrong, I'm sorry if there was a misunderstanding and let me show you why" would be an adult's response. But nursing half a decade's worth of whinging is still much too precious to some apparently.
I have no regrets, just as I have no regrets over tossing out the Michael Moore apologists or the Islamophobic jackasses. None of you are missed.
We've already proven where you've lied about us, and spewed your filthy personal attacks against us, while at the same time accusing us of those things against you. (Asking us to say that we're "sorry if there was a misunderstanding" is perhaps the richest bit of bullshit you've ever served up. Bravo.) It's you who owes us an apology. But since that will never happen, at least we can all agree that we're happier this way. It's nice when things work out.
All I'm getting from this is that Dean wants to enjoy the right to scream, yell, and insult when he gets the urge, but doesn't like it when people talk about it. No surprise there, though.
Moving on.