War Is Peace, Etc.
I think the president missed that article from Salon the other day. You know, this one. The one with the byline, "U.S. Military...can't muster many more combat troops for the war." So where exactly do you plan to find these troops you mean to send forth to battle terrorism, Mr. Bush?
You know, they say that in Hitler's last days, crouched in his bunker while the Russians took Berlin, the Führer was still giving orders for troops who weren't there to move against fronts that had already been overrun, too. You know, because Hitler was nuts.
Then again, I suppose that's why Bush hasn't offered any proposals as to how he plans to accomplish this new military buildup, just more empty (and increasingly weak) rhetoric.
I especially liked this little nonsensical tidbit: "It is an accurate reflection that this ideological war we're in is going to last for a while and that we're going to need a military that's capable of being able to sustain our efforts and to help us achieve peace." You read that correctly--"fighting for peace." Isn't that a little like fucking for virginity?
Okay, so it's not entirely nonsensical. Not if you're at all familiar with the ideology and aims of this administration. But at this point, who isn't?
You know, they say that in Hitler's last days, crouched in his bunker while the Russians took Berlin, the Führer was still giving orders for troops who weren't there to move against fronts that had already been overrun, too. You know, because Hitler was nuts.
Then again, I suppose that's why Bush hasn't offered any proposals as to how he plans to accomplish this new military buildup, just more empty (and increasingly weak) rhetoric.
I especially liked this little nonsensical tidbit: "It is an accurate reflection that this ideological war we're in is going to last for a while and that we're going to need a military that's capable of being able to sustain our efforts and to help us achieve peace." You read that correctly--"fighting for peace." Isn't that a little like fucking for virginity?
Okay, so it's not entirely nonsensical. Not if you're at all familiar with the ideology and aims of this administration. But at this point, who isn't?
Labels: politics
posted by Drew at 3:38 PM
1 Comments:
Unfortunately, I think Bush is neither stupid nor insane. I think his major failing is arrogance, but all in all, he accomplished his aim extremely well. He increased the scarcity, and therefore the value, of the commodity his family and their allies based their fortunes upon. In addition, he made gajillions for Halliburton by blowing stuff up so they could repair it. The fact that he cost the United States its reputation as well as its dignity means absolutely nothing to him, from what I can see.
On the other hand, maybe I'm wrong. He did seem caught off guard by the Democratic sweep of Congress and the Senate, so who knows. I initially attributed it to arrogance, but arrogance is really just another form of stupidity. What I really don't agree with is the idea that he might have actually thought Iraq was a good idea, but was too stupid to pull it off. (Not that this is what you're saying.) I think he knew exactly what was going to happen, but he chose to sacrifice his country to achieve his own greedy purposes.
Yikes, the comment was longer than the blog! Sorry 'bout that!
Post a Comment
<< Home