Your Thinking Will Be Molded. So Says the Collective.
By Thomas Posted in War — Comments (33) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Congratulations to the moonbats (including Chief Acupuncture Moonbat) for successfully telling one heck of a lie -- and making it stick:
Sigfrido Ranucci, who made the documentary for the RAI television channel aired two weeks ago, said that a US intelligence assessment had characterised WP after the first Gulf War as a “chemical weapon”.
The assessment was published in a declassified report on the American Department of Defence website. The file was headed: “Possible use of phosphorous chemical weapons by Iraq in Kurdish areas along the Iraqi-Turkish-Iranian borders.”
In late February 1991, an intelligence source reported, during the Iraqi crackdown on the Kurdish uprising that followed the coalition victory against Iraq, “Iraqi forces loyal to President Saddam may have possibly used white phosphorous chemical weapons against Kurdish rebels and the populace in Erbil and Dohuk. The WP chemical was delivered by artillery rounds and helicopter gunships.”
According to the intelligence report, the “reports of possible WP chemical weapon attacks spread quickly among the populace in Erbil and Dohuk. As a result, hundreds of thousands of Kurds fled from these two areas” across the border into Turkey.
“When Saddam used WP it was a chemical weapon,” said Mr Ranucci, “but when the Americans use it, it’s a conventional weapon. The injuries it inflicts, however, are just as terrible however you describe it.”
Hey, geniuses:
(1) Put down your copy of Heroes Unlimited. White phosphorus grenades are not, in fact, deadly weapons to be used whenever you are faced by rampaging elementals, mutant ninja turtles, or government armored helicopters.
(2) White phosphorus is not a chemical weapon. If you believe it is, you do not understand (1) what a chemical weapon is, (2) what white phosphorus is, or (3) what white phosphorus is used for. By this logic, tracer rounds and, indeed, gunpowder, are chemical weapons. I guess the aggressive use of halitosis could be, too, while we're at it.
(3) Now, most moonbats are science-illiterate, and congenitally averse to learning anything about the military that won't let them re-enact the Vietnam protests again; but Chief Moonbat, a former artillery boy, should know better. As my esteemed colleague John Cole puts it (in a much better, and lengthier post), however:
I am sick and tired of defending Kos. His behavior in this affair has been inexcusable, and it is clear he will do or say anything to attack this administration. ...
I am so sick of these people pulling this [garbage]. And don’t be confused- this is ALL about bringing down Bush. Whatever the cost. I am so angry I can barely type right now.
See, I just go the easy route, and call Markos a traitor for trying to drag down his own country to win a political war.
Happy Thanksgiving, folks. (That's probably a sonic weapon, so be careful not to say it around lefties.)
« We need more COIN in the Afghan realm — Comments (0) | Disbanding the Iraqi Army: An Assessment — Comments (20) »
Your Thinking Will Be Molded. So Says the Collective. 33 Comments (0 topical, 33 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
"Technically white phosphorous isn't illegal. And any news story reflecting badly on the administration is a plot by 'the left'."
If a method is not technically illegal, it doesn't follow that the court of world opinion will hold us blameless for using that method. The blunt fact is that as this war becomes more and more unpopular, any little thing like this will be magnified to 1000x its normal size, and will be used in such a way as to make the war even more unpopular.
What if Bush did contemplate bombing a target in Qatar? If it's true, the next technicality will be "well, he was only contemplating the repercussions of such a thing, he didn't actually do it." Doesn't make the story any less damaging to the world's opinion of us.
What if Bush did contemplate bombing a target in Qatar? If it's true, the next technicality will be "well, he was only contemplating the repercussions of such a thing, he didn't actually do it."
I put this in the same category as Reagan's comment about bombing the Russians. Easy to argue that it was bad taste, but no one with neurons to rub together took it seriously, as he intended.
I was pretty well blasted by folks in college years and years ago for saying things like "The country needs Reagan." etc, so I guess I was a magnet for leftist agit-prop.
I was told many things by grad students (ta's) and other undergraduates like:
WP is a chemical weapon
Napalm is a chemical weapon
Colored smoke is a chemical weapon
Depleted uranium is a nuclear weapon
.50 cal MG's can't legally be used against infantry attacks
Halitosis never made the list, but I think it is technically, like bovine flatulance, and cans of MGD, it is a biological weapon.
Det 553A was denied tooth brushes, floss, and Crest in order to increase enemy casualties in the CentCom AOA? Sy Hersh wants to know why the IG isn't sniffing around the 5SFG!
Have not, since their praise and support of the killers of Americans in Fallujah, been a source of legitimate information.
That they think their sheep are too stupid to understand the difference between WP and nerve agents or chemical posions is hardly surprising. they have successfully bet on the stupidity of their flock for quite awhile.
what the world thinks of us. They are either going to have a good opinion of us, or a bad opinion of us.
For us to tailor everything we do to form world opinion in our favor is folly.
It's like two parents trying to raise 10 kids and making them all happy and all of the kids adoring the parents all of the time.
IMO, it's as simple as that.
The whole WP issue has prompted the Kos gang to actuallly admit that Hussein committed war crimes.
Of course, they get their panties in a bunch about using WP to trick people into thinking it was a chemical attack, but nobody cares about the gassing, rapes, and "Itchy and Scratchy Reenactments."
must not matter. When we start imposing a test of likability by the effete in Europe who allow riots to continue for three weeks because they can't figure out why people are burning cars or worry about the opinions of third world wackys who take time out from murdering their own people to criticize the US we can just pack up the idea of civilization.
If these idiots are concerned about the possibility of bombing Qatar they would have cardiac arrest if they had some idea of the active war plans that are on the shelf at the Pentagon.
When the people who are concerned about the "popularity" of war are able to defend themselves I'll care about their opinions.
they are off the delusional bs about Saddam benig just a hamrless tough guy?
What maroons.
It's not about Europeans or any other specific group. It's more than just building an opinion of Americans or our government as "likeable". There are still some people in this country who want the U.S. to hold the moral and ethical high ground in more real ways than just saying that we hold it.
But does this mean we're not really using Glitter Boys and SAMAS in Iraq?
I'm more curious as to the default skills of the Moonbat O.C.C.
and you are worried about "world opinion".
We would be talking about the Europeans (old Europe of course). These are people whose bureaucrats keep flogging the EU Constitution that their populace has repeatedly turned down by proposing that the "national assemblies" vote on it rather that a general election. The same people who blatantly steal from OIF and prop up Saddam in the face of his atrocities. The same people who won't act on genocide in Africa because they're just black Africans, not really people. The same people who applaud Robert Mugabe at every turn.
Or would we be talking about the "third world". People who are currently trying to block ethics investigations at the UN. Or the ones who rabidly support Mugabe, the butchers in Rwanda and Darfur, the PLO, and who vote at every opportunity to condemn Israel and the US.
Or there are the people who run their dictatorships and oppress their people while complaining about our treatment of detainees at Gitmo.
Yeah, world opinion is really important. Any reasonable man would be able to look at the actors in this play and know that the US holds the moral high ground because we define it. The idea that we need to seek approval of the thugs is a pathetic joke.
It would be illogical to call Kos a traitor. By definition a true patriot speaks out when he sees errors and wrong-doing. One cannot be a traitor and a patriot at the same time.
It would be illogical to call Kos a traitor. By definition a true patriot speaks out when he sees errors and wrong-doing. One cannot be a traitor and a patriot at the same time.
while I'm always amused by the definitions given for "true patriotism", at the end of the day the definition also has to include "not rooting for your country to lose a war even if it means your party picks up a few house seats".
is pretty silly. Not saying he's a traitor. A poseur. A provocateur. A fellow traveler with our enemies. Almost certainly all of those. But not a traitor.
There are still some people in this country who want the U.S. to hold the moral and ethical high ground...
If you're one of these people, then why specifically do you want to do this? Are you making a distinction between "holding the high ground" and simply "doing the right thing"? If not, then specifically what unethical and immoral things ought we to stop doing?
I think America does awfully well in the moral and ethical department, both absolutely and by comparison with other countries. To take RetNAV one step further: if you're a success, there will always be people who will hate you for it. That's not a reason to stop being a success.
The right thing is to follow the truth. Whereever it leads
the DOD calls WP a chemical weapon.
You can rant and rave all you want about Kos, and you can have your own definition for what a chemical weapon is, but at the end of the day, the DOD themselves called WP a chemical weapon, and there is nothing you can say to refute this.
As far as our thinking being molded by the collective, what do you think Limbaugh et al, all the way up to Fox News have been doing for the last 25 years? You have your own collective, whose purpose it is to mold people's thoughts. You need to be honest about this before you can accuse others of molding peoples' thoughts.
As a famous saying goes, which you probably have heard, when you point one finger out, there are three of them pointing back at you.
"What if Bush did contemplate bombing a target in Qatar?"
When contemplation turns to action it will be time for celebration.
"One cannot be a traitor and a patriot at the same time"
Agreed. He's a traitor. He gives aid and comfort to our enemies. He has the same goal as the terrorists: US failure in Iraq.
I guess Hanoi Jane is a patriot too.
...and Kos still qualifies as a patriot under your caveat. If you actually read his thoughts you would have to agree. It would be more helpful if you could share with us an instance where he was "rooting for your country to lose a war".
He served his country in uniform and he expresses his opinions about the world we live in. What could be more patriotic?
BTW which branch of the service did you serve in?
warning here.
You are on the verge of chickenhawking, an act that will lead to your summary expulsion.
What branch of service the poster served in, or even if he served, has nothing more to do with the validity of the post in question that does serving as a freaking private in an MLRS battalion give you the qualifications to speak about anything more militarily significant that latrine cleaning.
...but you still haven't shown a single instance of "rooting for your country to lose a war" by Kos. Last time I checked, he has the same freedom of expression that you and I do. His patriotism was in question and that's why I mentioned his military service. To imply he's not qualified to speak about anything more military than cleaning latrines demonstrates a certain lack of logic.
I would say that DOD write up stops pretty short of calling it a chemical weapon. I also think anybody not out to try to play politics can easily understand how WP does not fit the accepted definition of a chemical weapon.
In simplistic terms, it's a chemical that creates a fire, the fire being the weapon
Inside a bullet is a chemical (gunpowder) used to launch the bullet. Is a bullet a chemical weapon? If I claimed a DOD website said it was, would it be?
demonstrates the fallacy of disregarding a warning.
But before you toddle off to dKos and snivel in your "I was banned from RedState" diary:
1- I didn't set out to show instances, others have done so in graphic detail
2- Yes he does, it just doesn't mean it is credible.
3- Three words: General Benedict Arnold.
4- Actually it doesn't since that was the level at which he served.
we do very well, we're not in that position for no reason. We're not in the position of aribter just because we say so (even though to some, I'm sure that is the case). To go back to my original post: we need to NOT do these things in this particular war, things that can be taken and magnified to 1000x and used to undermine that position, for the sole reason that we're the agressor in this war. It's very very easy to mold opinion against the agressor, it only takes the smallest push.
I'll tell you what's truly pathetic: this attitude that the US is the de facto standard because we say so, and your use of the worst element of society to define the entire non-American world population.
Let's just commit a few war crimes! Kill anybody who disagrees with us, just like the Nazis used to do!
You're a sick individual if you seriously would celebrate something like that.
the gullible is the politically saavy thing to do. He's convinced himself, it seems, that he's something of a strategist.
Here is an explanation of WP and its military use from someone who has used it. In Iraq.
Heck, the next thing, our friends on the left will inform us that the President wanted to level al-Jazeera. The (other) Downing Street Memo, like the first but unseen, says so.