|
|
|
|
Back to Main
|
||
|
July 23, 2005
WB: War of the Words
Comments
Do you ever try to see things from the other side’s perspective? Let me help you. Imagine — I mean, really imagine, in as much vivid, realistic detail as you can muster — that you have secured one of the top position’s in a Democratic administration. The administration has started a war you honestly believe, all things considered, is a just war. Your job is to help bring that war to a successful close as quickly and effectively as possible. Things are really going rough — it’s much harder going than you ever expected and the Republicans are trying to point out your every little misstep and then shouting, “We told you so.” Then, you get even more bad news — there has been more than a few instances of really egregious prisoner abuse, complete with repugnant, incendiary photos. Now, even though you don’t condone the specific behavior in question, you know that if the news spreads, it will only add fuel to the fire — not just the Republican/media fire at home, but it will severely harm your war efforts due to severe backlash within the enemy’s wider culture. What do you do? Posted by: MikeL | Jul 23 2005 21:27 utc | 1
How about acknowledge the catastrophic failure of your policies and do the honorable thing and resign? Posted by: Lexington | Jul 23 2005 22:01 utc | 4 Mike, you’re myopic. Granted what’s been done has been done. The problem is how to put an end to it quickly before any more harm is done. Hiding from Americans the evidence only prolongs a disastrous policy. Exposing it, increases the probability that we can finally free the Republic of the crazy loons who’ve seized the reins, outlaw torture & prevent an invasion of Iran. Posted by: jj | Jul 23 2005 22:20 utc | 6 By the way, “position’s” should not have an apostrophe, I know. Anyway, my comments have to be considered in context. Specifically, they were a response to Billmon’s post about Rumsfeld’s attempts to keep the news/photos of prisoner abuse from spreading. You really think that any one of you would do differently in his position? I doubt it. If you were partly responsible for the genesis and orchestration of a war you believed, at least initially, to be justified (even if you were guilty of exaggerating the case for it), and a scandal like this broke, your responsibility as conductor of the war would weigh heavily on you to minimize the impact. Imagine what such news/photos do in the heart/mind of a Muslim/Arab. It’s like gas on a fire you’re trying desperately to put out. Posted by: MikeL | Jul 23 2005 22:36 utc | 7 MikeL, as you’ve surely noted; democrats would demand a change in policy and a full investigation. We’re not much on this ‘Oh Great Leader’ crap. Important distinction, this. Posted by: ken melvin | Jul 23 2005 22:41 utc | 8 Billmon, you’re working too hard. It’s all great stuff, because you are incandescent, working at full efficiency, which is wonderful, except that incandescence implies combustion and energy transfer. Remember it happened once before. No criticism, just a friend asking you to take a short break. Life is a long term proposition. The United States is entering into an historic crisis. With time off, away from the headlines, you’ll be able to see the world in 3-D. Physical stuff like mountains and plains, from sea to shining sea. Come to CR for a week or two. Posted by: Frank Kelly | Jul 23 2005 23:00 utc | 9 mikel you are barking up the wrong tree here, all this ‘oh please understand from the other side,’ lets get one thing straight , there is absolutely no evideence bush or cheney &co are trying to put out any fires. that is a load of crap. they are responsible for the mess we are in, and they are responsible for the torture , they allowed for it and they created the conditions for it, they are only covering their asses, and trying to avoid taking responsibilty. how about you try seeing this from another perspective. like the child who got raped by prisoners. wrong tree, peddle your lets all be reasonable jargon w/ a different crowd, you won’t find any takers here. Posted by: annie | Jul 23 2005 23:04 utc | 10 F**K “the other sides perspective” It’s exactly this narrow thinking ie that there is black and white, good and bad, one side and the other side, that has lead the world and in particular the US up the path of self delusion into mass murder. Posted by: Debs is dead | Jul 23 2005 23:05 utc | 11 ps I didn’t sub the last sentence which now implies that I live in the US. For what it’s worth I don’t. The way I see it we’re all pretty much in the same sack of shit anyhow. Posted by: Debs is dead | Jul 23 2005 23:08 utc | 12 I’d have sympathy for MikeL’s point of view if he was calling for the impeachment of the entire US administration. Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 23 2005 23:14 utc | 13 one more thing mikel, if the admin had EVER thought this war was justified they would not have lied to us to get us there, they could have told us the truth. they exploited a situation to get us there because they knew we would never have gone otherwise. exactly the same reason we aren’t allowed to see the notes on the energy meetings. they make up their minds behind closed doors, do whatever they want, and refuse to be held accountable. i know what i would do if i was in their shoes. so don’t be telling me i’d ever be following in their footsteps w/any decision they have made. Posted by: annie | Jul 23 2005 23:14 utc | 14 Specifically, they were a response to Billmon’s post about Rumsfeld’s attempts to keep the news/photos of prisoner abuse from spreading. You really think that any one of you would do differently in his position? Posted by: Billmon | Jul 23 2005 23:16 utc | 15 NYTimes Posted by: alabama | Jul 23 2005 23:25 utc | 16 And this invites me to wonder something else: when will some member of the press, in a “gaggle” of his own devising, put the question to Keller and “Pinch” Sulzberger about Judith K. Miller’s association with known criminals, no doubt in the pursuit of her own criminal ends? We’ve all heard about the strange silence of Bush, McClellan and such, but we’ve yet to hear about the silence of Richard Stevenson and such. We might call it “the coverup at The New York Times,” because, in fact the Timesitself is stonewalling. Posted by: alabama | Jul 23 2005 23:27 utc | 17 MikeL- millions of people in America and western Europe came out in opposition to an invasion of Iraq because 1) they thought it would make the situations in the world worse, not better, 2) they read reports and news and knew that Bush, et.al were lying, to the best of their ability to know, 3) they had the evidence of the history of the Bush administrations lies and total disregard for principles like, oh, democracy and rule of law and separation of church and state, and so why should they think these people could be trusted? 4) the energy policy task force papers, 5) Scott Ritter, the IAEC, various ambassadors who resigned, Generals who were kicked out…you get the picture, maybe? Posted by: fauxreal | Jul 23 2005 23:37 utc | 18 Billmon forgot to note the context in which this is occurring. Posted by: jj | Jul 24 2005 0:11 utc | 19 Why can’t we all just get along? Posted by: MikeL | Jul 24 2005 0:22 utc | 20 This men behind this war condemned themselves, the moment they decided they had to hide its true cost. Posted by: SteinL | Jul 24 2005 0:41 utc | 21 I was in Syria last April when the whole Abu Ghraib thing broke in the news. It was the same night that Damascus saw its first terrorist attack in many many years. We had been up on the mountain to watch night come over the city and ended up listening to grenades and machine gun fire. When we finally got home, the police showed up at our dooor with ak-47’s–they just wanted to know if we were parked on the street, and if we were (we weren’t–we didn’t have a car) we would have to move our car==to prove it wasn’t wired. The next day was our last day in Syria. The whole day is under a cloud in my memory. I will never forget watching satellite tv to find news of the attack only to be hit with that horrible picture of the man on the box. It was sickening and shaming, and we all own it to this day. Posted by: pegm | Jul 24 2005 0:49 utc | 22 MikeL Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 24 2005 0:50 utc | 23 It’s not clear to me that public exposure of these photos of depravity is the best choice. There isn’t a best choice. The buffoons have made such a mess of it. More and more choices are nothing but Sophie’s Choice. Posted by: small coke | Jul 24 2005 0:57 utc | 24 It’s as simple as this–if you want to see the lies that led us to this war exposed, if you have hope that somehow we could turn back the tide that has eroded our freedoms and made our country the world’s villain, then you want to see these phots come out. If you think we are somehow on the right course and that pretending that these unpleasant things never happened will actually help us somehow, then you don’t want to see then come out. As they say, denial is not just a river in Egypt. Posted by: pegm | Jul 24 2005 1:05 utc | 25 MikeL, Posted by: Jassalasca Jape | Jul 24 2005 1:07 utc | 26 small coke: here’s a deal the dems should go for- Posted by: fauxreal | Jul 24 2005 1:10 utc | 27 the false question put by mikel is so stupidly insensate – so barbaric are its inferences – it does not even merit this comment. i am in complete accord with cloned poster on this – fire we need – but there is a healthy cleansing fire Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jul 24 2005 1:14 utc | 28 I hold no hope for a Bush impeachment, but I truly believe that he will become the American Pinochet, beleaguered on all sides and welcome nowhere. It is my fond hope that he will live the rest of his life afraid to leave that hell he calls home. Posted by: pegm | Jul 24 2005 1:15 utc | 29 & always this dumb presumptions by a certain type of visitor here – who in almost every instance are not really asking questions – who do not see the obvious differences amongst this community (which in & of itself creates profounder resonances) & that there exist no hegemonic position here on almost every question . what is shared however is a form of decency & a very real desire to communicate Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jul 24 2005 1:54 utc | 30 I sat upon the shore Posted by: slothrop | Jul 24 2005 1:56 utc | 31 Or should we just roll the dice and take the truth staight up? Posted by: Billmon | Jul 24 2005 2:12 utc | 32 The photos and videos need to be released. The full horror of what we have allowed to be done in our names must be brought home to us if there is to be any hope of our avoiding another repetition of past bad behavior when the present iteration is over. Posted by: John Francis Lee | Jul 24 2005 2:20 utc | 33 If you were partly responsible for the genesis and orchestration of a war you believed, at least initially, to be justified (even if you were guilty of exaggerating the case for it), and a scandal like this broke, your responsibility as conductor of the war would weigh heavily on you to minimize the impact. MikeL @ 6:36 PM Posted by: alabama | Jul 24 2005 2:23 utc | 34 But if neither of these, what then? Simply this: while he no longer believes in the war, he happily uses it as a pretext to silence his critics. Because he hates his critics more than he hates his “enemy”. Such a Rumsfeld is never wrong, takes no responsibility for mistakes occurring on his watch, and punishes, without remorse, anyone who might presume to fault the wisdom or competence of his leadership. In other words, MikeL, he’s just another self-serving, power-hungry narcissist who can’t, and won’t, accept criticism. A trivial fellow, finally, and a truly unworthy person–hardly an object, at least, for anyone’s admiration. And in fact he’s losing this war: those who serve him will either have to die for him (but is he really worth dying for?), or kill him off to survive (but is he really worth anyone’s jail-time?). Posted by: alabama | Jul 24 2005 2:24 utc | 35 If I were a murdering torturing bastard would I like proof of this displayed? No, probably not. Posted by: A swedish kind of death | Jul 24 2005 2:38 utc | 36 A swedish kind of death, it’s a fact that murdering torturing bastatrds have always liked proof of this displayed. it makes them feel strong, it makes them happy–provided they control the time, place, medium and quality of the display. Unhappy the sadist who lacks a public to wow–sadism having an extraordinary component of exhibitionism (Freud’s “Three Essays” provides us some leads on this particular psychic structure). And this, of course, is the governing obsession of Rumsfeld’s WSJ editorial: he can’t control the publicity surrounding his sadism. And he well understands that the internet is a principal source of his misery. Sadistic control freaks can’t abide the blogosphere–those in government, to begin with, but those in the MSM as well. Posted by: alabama | Jul 24 2005 2:52 utc | 37 In reply to small cokes contention that suppressing the photos or getting poets to interpret them is a choice: Posted by: Debs is dead | Jul 24 2005 2:52 utc | 38 alabama has put it briefly but well – their most human & terrible of crimes is that they never ever take responsibility. point Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jul 24 2005 2:52 utc | 39 the terrible doubleside of the internet provides more than ample proof of our complicity in their actions no matter how vehemently we oppose them Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jul 24 2005 2:55 utc | 40 MIKEL, truly imagine putting yourself in the minds of people who purposely lie at the initiation of shit, and then continue to steal, cheat, lie, forge and fuck throughout that shit, and then claim that exposing their shit would only encourage their prosecuters. Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 24 2005 3:02 utc | 41 An excellent point, remembereringgiap: why would anyone want to study those images….? Posted by: alabama | Jul 24 2005 3:04 utc | 42 Do you ever try to see things from the other side’s perspective? Posted by: bcf | Jul 24 2005 3:05 utc | 43 great post, Debs. I like your solution…release the photos with the indictments. Posted by: fauxreal | Jul 24 2005 3:24 utc | 44 When we have need to study those qualities in ourselves, bcf (in order to subdue them, shall we say) then seeing things from the perspective of “deceitful, traitorous, conspiratorial, lying, torture-loving, law-breaker, mongering, possibly genocidal war criminals” is certainly the way to proceed. This would be one reason among many, I suppose, for the enduring fascination of Hamlet, Othello and Macbeth… My quarrel with Rumsfeld (if I have one) is the mincing pettiness and abiding triviality of his performance as compared to those of your truly virile villains…. Posted by: alabama | Jul 24 2005 3:33 utc | 45 Hmm oh well it appears I’m not the only one in a total fouler today. I’m not sure if it was this story or the execution of Jean Charles de Menezes formerly known as “The Brazilian’ or ‘a terrorist suspect’ that set me up to be pissed at some fool’s limp wristed attempt at excusing torture, but along with a few others in here; pissed I am. Posted by: Debs is dead | Jul 24 2005 3:34 utc | 46 I’m with faux and Debs, release the photos for evidence under articles of impeachment, then war crimes trials. Keep repeating; impeachment, impeachment, impeachment. Posted by: jdp | Jul 24 2005 3:35 utc | 47 Great book — The Nuremberg Interviews. Posted by: Antifa | Jul 24 2005 3:59 utc | 48 This is complicated. What’s even worse than this horror of sadism is the peep show going on around it with people doing nothing but salivating in anticipation of the next round of abuse. The lack of action against this shame of humanity is the real prurient behavior. Posted by: jm | Jul 24 2005 4:02 utc | 49 Yes, re the qoute from Powell above about seeing how our Democracy handles this … that statement was noted and many did wait and watch … and all the subsequent actions of denial, excuses, evasions, deciets, coverups and banal justifications along with the patheticly trivial punishments awarded to only the ‘foot soldiers’, reservists all, with no commanders, or Intel, let alone leadership figures being held accountable has surely shown how our Democracy works … the world has waited and judged us and found us wanting. Posted by: Outraged | Jul 24 2005 4:12 utc | 50 @ Did – yes, that is the subtext, part of it. In the short run, and I’m not feeling much more optimistic about the long. Billmon’s suggestion would be a start. fauxreal too. But we all know that’s not going to happen. So we know the real options are cruielly limited – Sophie’s choice. Posted by: small coke | Jul 24 2005 4:28 utc | 51 MikeL said “Imagine what such news/photos do in the heart/mind of a Muslim/Arab. It’s like gas on a fire you’re trying desperately to put out.” Posted by: DeborahT | Jul 24 2005 4:43 utc | 52 Mikel Posted by: razor | Jul 24 2005 4:49 utc | 53 @small coke As I said above in reference to MikeL’s posting not yours, I’m in a foul fettle today which of course doesn’t excuse my posts but perhaps explains them a little. Posted by: Debs is dead | Jul 24 2005 6:45 utc | 54 B is correct. If the Mob really believed God spoke through them, ‘onward Christian soldiers’, then they’d demand full disclosure and public trial for Abu Ghraib and the other Iraq evils. Posted by: Frank Omelek | Jul 24 2005 7:10 utc | 55 small coke writes: Perhaps the question should be what will public exposure accomplish? Posted by: s9 | Jul 24 2005 7:11 utc | 56 http://www.crawford-texas.org/id4.html Posted by: Frank Omelek | Jul 24 2005 7:32 utc | 57 Weird stuff Frank Omelek,
very strange, the photos have been retouched and appear to give halos to Dear Leader. Posted by: dan of steele | Jul 24 2005 7:57 utc | 58 Discussions and arguments are by and large useless when those responsible for the situation refuse to rebut or even acknowledge their role in creating them. Posted by: Father Tyme | Jul 24 2005 14:00 utc | 60 After reading Spot and Barney’s page, it took 3 tissues!! Now I can see to type!! Losing a pet is a terrible thing. Posted by: Billmon | Jul 24 2005 18:28 utc | 61 s9, Posted by: anna missed | Jul 24 2005 18:58 utc | 62 Then again, maybe Richard Perle could work up a Jackie Vernon routine. Posted by: anna missed | Jul 24 2005 19:15 utc | 63 s9
Posted by: slothrop | Jul 24 2005 19:50 utc | 64 We could use a bill hicks. But no matter how much leno makes fun of bush, this comedy only too often confirms the power of self-mockery–a luxury only enjoyed among powerful people. Posted by: slothrop | Jul 24 2005 19:52 utc | 65 The thing that gets me is MikeL saying this legislator thinking this is a just war, all things considered. Posted by: fauxreal | Jul 24 2005 20:44 utc | 66 Fauxreal has Named It: Posted by: jj | Jul 24 2005 20:53 utc | 67 Just a quick drive-by from me so I can feel I’ve banged my head in frustration with the best of ’em… Posted by: Monolycus | Jul 24 2005 21:20 utc | 68 Grrr. “subservise” translates to “subversive” in Typonese for those of you keeping score at home. Posted by: Monolycus | Jul 24 2005 21:24 utc | 69 Monolycus, you’re posing a rather severe “either/or”in your 5:24 PM post, one that could apply to any or all of us, comic or otherwise: eitherwe’re “subversive,” or we’re “sell-outs” and “enablers”. Is this what you really believe (and you wouldn’t be alone if you do)?…. Or are you upholding a particular standard for comedians; more particularly, for popular comedians; more particularly still, for rich, popular comedians; and most particularly of all, for rich, popular comedians who also hope to be treated with respect by opponents of the war? Posted by: alabama | Jul 24 2005 22:06 utc | 70 @alabama Posted by: Monolycus | Jul 25 2005 0:46 utc | 71 “everybody knows the boat is leaking Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jul 25 2005 1:01 utc | 72 Mother of God. Posted by: gylangirl | Jul 25 2005 3:31 utc | 73 On the topic of humour, I scratched around in my meagre archives and came up with this. Posted by: Jassalasca Jape | Jul 25 2005 10:22 utc | 74 Jassa, Posted by: A swedish kind of death | Jul 25 2005 10:50 utc | 75 Thanks, Jassa. That was a fair piece of subversion. Posted by: Monolycus | Jul 25 2005 19:06 utc | 76 |
||