25 Comments

1. Walter Mitty  •  Jul 30, 2006 @11:44 pm
   

   Ever since I completed boot camp I’ve lost my ability to entertain military fantasies… For now, I find that being a sexy rock star wiggling before throngs of sex starved young women seems to fill my needs. Although as I approachpass middle age my audience is becoming more mature and my music is gravitating toward Sinatra and Englebert Humperdink tunes.

2. A. Citizen  •  Jul 31, 2006 @12:33 am
   

   I really don’t think posting on drivel such as this AssClown is very productive. No one, let me repeat that, no one in the Corporate Media or the Swamp-of-the-Mouth-Breathers is worth the effort it would take to piss on them if they were on fire.

   I’d rather hear more about progressive infrastructure building or progressive candidates or even Middle-East analysis but not more of this drivel, please.

3. Julie O.  •  Jul 31, 2006 @12:52 am
   

   Yeah, British and European educations are what lead to the downfall of all the great civiliations of the past. It sure wasn’t internal corruption or imperial overreaching, or anything like that.

4. justme  •  Jul 31, 2006 @2:29 am
   

   He can take the first step to healing us all by example… no need to wait for all the time enlisting takes…..just jump on a plane and head to iraq…No uniform needed!!!!!! Perhaps he IS on to something…..why should we waste our troops time doing “a little light colonial policing”?, when we could be using guys like him for free and reserving our troops for big conflicts…..No uniform needed!!!! Whatever mark and his pals have in their closets will do…dockers and deck shoes will be perfect!Outstanding fightin gear!No longer can righties claim “I am too old to enlist” or “the military won’t take me” No uniform is needed ….you can just go fight in the war without even signing up…Mark says so…
   I personally will pay marks way to bagdad to join the fight. I notice the golf courses in my local area are FULL of marks type 7 days a week…one would think they would not be so full at a time of war(snark)…but perhaps he can find some guys to join him there.Mark, buddy,,, wanna go join the fight in your dockers???”No uniforms needed” goes both ways pal…..put up or shut up!!!!!!Our troops could come home if you were man enough to do what you call”a little light policing” our troops job is to defend the constitution BTW,,,check out their oath asshole,, it doesn’t say anything about ” a little light policing” so buck up and free our poor boys up to do their jobs and step up and do the “light policing” YOURSELVES you think needs to be done…WUSS!
   He makes his own case that lack of education is what is wrong,,, it no doubt shows in him.

5. zeus  •  Jul 31, 2006 @3:46 am
   

   “It’s the ideas that drive a war and the support they command in the broader society that determine whether you’ll see it through to real victory.”

   So let me get this straight. If we civilians simply support Bush in Iraq, we will be victorious? It’s all up to us – not the people actually fighting it? OK, I’ll start now and when we win, maybe-just maybe, I will share my medals with some of those in uniform. And shame on those of us that gave up on Vietnam. If we had only hung in there, I’m sure we would only have lost a few thousand more souls before victory was ours. Oh darn!

   And I won’t be caught off guard again. I will be prepared next time dear leader decides to take his ’73 Oldsmobile for a spin.

6. maha  •  Jul 31, 2006 @5:53 am
   

   not more of this drivel, please.

   I write about whatever I get an urge to write about. You don’t have to read it.

7. doran  •  Jul 31, 2006 @7:00 am
   

   Steyn asserts that HE does not have to be in uniform to fight a war in Iraq (from the chair at his computer terminal in where?), while his right wing loonie comrades assert that it is wrong, WRONG I tell you, for the Palestinians in Gaza and Lebanon, who really are fighting the kind of war where they bleed and die, to fight that war without wearing uniforms. Typical loonie right bloviating, hypocritical stupidity. I wonder if Steyn thinks he is a legitimate military target, as a result of his self-titled role as combatant? If someone against whom he is fighting (only god knows who that might me, I bet Steyn couldn’t tell you with any certainty) were to blow up his house where he is fighting his war (what is that address?), and kill a lot of neighbor kids in the process, would that be ok?

   Could he legally be “captured” and held as a POW for ransom or exchange for, say, Hamden? Has he any future rights at the VA for injuries to his butt and cardiovascular system incurred while sitting around for hours and hours, fighting his war? Is carpal tunnel symdrome a service related disability?

   Maha, his stuff really is drivel, not yours. I think you misinterpreted A. Citizen. But please, post on whatever you wish, especially the continuing decay of the blogosphere’s right wing.

8. maha  •  Jul 31, 2006 @8:07 am
   

   Typical loonie right bloviating, hypocritical stupidity.

   Well, using rightie logic, if sleeping babies in Qana are Hezbollah combatants, Steyn must be a bleeping general.

9. temperance  •  Jul 31, 2006 @9:37 am
   

   Thanks for posting this, maha. I think casting a glaring light on rightie rhetoric is HUGELY important in this day and age. Reading your post this morning was like having a nice plate of chickenhawk tenders with my coffee. I think Steyn’s statement “ideas drive a war” is unintentionally accurate in the sense that the ideological labor performed by the MSM, right-wing blogs, federally-funded propaganda campaigns, etc. can account for why people still think we should stay in Iraq until “victory” is achieved and all The Terrorists are dead. “Ideas drive a war” – yes, ideas like “Saddam was connected to 9/11” and “Saddam had WMDs” and “we’ll be greeted as liberators.”

   I wonder what A. Citizen would have to say about John Dean’s new book? “Enough about conservative ideology! More on progressive infrastructure building!” The Media Matters website? “Wasting their time on Corporate Media? What drivel!”

10. Britwit  •  Jul 31, 2006 @10:40 am
    

    I can’t believe that Mark Steyn can support himself as a writer. I read the article in the Chicago newspaper and it was an effort to get through his writing. It is so convuluted.

    His thinking is that of one twisted mister.

    No wonder Maha said, “I can’t translate that” and the last sentence of her previous paragraph was “or something”.

11. Chief  •  Jul 31, 2006 @11:26 am
    

    I interpret some of Mr. Steyn’s remarks differently.

    “In fact, the notion that “fighting” a war is the monopoly of those “in uniform” gets to the heart of why America and its allies are having such a difficult time in the present struggle.”

    For your consideration: Could he be referring to the insurgents fighting an “assymetrical” war? Would “in uniform” refer to U.S., British et al troops not being able to cope with the insurgency/guerrilla concept.

    2. “In Iraq, the leviathan has somehow managed to give the impression that what previous mid-rank powers would have regarded as a little light colonial policing has left it stretched dangerously thin and bogged down in an almighty quagmire.”

    My interpretation: Some past colonial powers going back to the Roman legions, would ruthlessly suppress any dissent. Recall Jesus and Spartacus. The US et al has failed ‘b/c we’ve been too kind.

12. Steve M.  •  Jul 31, 2006 @11:33 am
    

    British and European education these last 30 years is now one of the biggest obstacles to civilizational self-preservation.

    This is almost exactly what was said during the rise of Hitler — that those who might oppose him were weak and flabby and peace-loving and therefore were unlikely to prevail (the implication being that Hitler would succeed because he deserved to, because he was making his people into ubermensches).

13. Steve M.  •  Jul 31, 2006 @11:37 am
    

    In Iraq, the leviathan has somehow managed to give the impression that what previous mid-rank powers would have regarded as a little light colonial policing has left it stretched dangerously thin and bogged down in an almighty quagmire.

    We’ll never know whether it could have become merely “light colonial policing” because the one absolutely sacrosanct rule of fighting this war has been Thou Shalt Not Question Rumsfeld’s Limits on Troop Deployment. The president of the United States has never been willing to cross his own SecDef on this issue.

14. eCAHNomics  •  Jul 31, 2006 @12:05 pm
    

    I’ve been considering the British Empire & how they used Indians as cannon fodder (Brits as officers, of course). Seemed to work quite well for a time. Perhaps that’s what the US should do with illegal immigrants–conscription. Estimated 12 million, probably more than half are males. US would then have enough troops to pacify Iraq.

15. Swami  •  Jul 31, 2006 @12:09 pm
    

    I think the leviathan is getting it’s ass kicked.

    Too many abuses of the civilian population to even hope for a good outcome. The opportunity to win hearts and minds is past and America is going to be bled to defeat through cost, lives, and political will. Even if we used all of our military might and bombed the Iraqis to complete destruction, we still will be the losers. I guesss Jesus gave Bush a bum steer when he told him to take-out Saddam. Maybe Jesus meant like take him out to dinner?

    I hate to sound like a cock-sure know it all, but it’s over in Iraq…We just have to come to grips with our defeat…It’s Vietnam revisited..

16. maha  •  Jul 31, 2006 @12:17 pm
    

    Could he be referring to the insurgents fighting an “assymetrical” war? Would “in uniform” refer to U.S., British et al troops not being able to cope with the insurgency/guerrilla concept.

    Not in the context of the article, no. Read the article. It’s specifically about how civilians who support the war “fight” just as much as soldiers in the field.

    Point number 2 — I don’t think that’s what he meant at all. I think he’s saying that people opposed to the war are being hysterical when they claim the U.S. military is “stretched dangerously thin and bogged down in an almighty quagmire.” Why, it’s just a little light colonial policing! What’s the big deal?

    But, as someone else said, Steyn sometimes gets lost in his own verbiage, and it can take some work to figure out what he means.

17. maha  •  Jul 31, 2006 @12:17 pm
    

    eCAHNomics — you’re kidding, right?

18. temperance  •  Jul 31, 2006 @12:33 pm
    

    jeez, I hope they were kidding.

    I love how Steyn criticizes education in the same sentence that he uses a fake word. I couldn’t find “civilizational” in any of my dictionaries.

19. lib4  •  Jul 31, 2006 @2:12 pm
    

    If he is so tough why not volunteer and suit up oh yeah he cant he’s not a American Citizen (canadian)

    Well since you love this country’ current war effort put your money where your mouth is and get US citizenship then you can be a General all you want from Iraq sir…

20. blogenfreude  •  Jul 31, 2006 @2:19 pm
    

    If he is so tough why not volunteer and suit up oh yeah he cant he’s not a American Citizen (canadian)

    I had a Canadian girlfriend who moved here and signed up for the Marine Corps. He could do that, but he’s probably too busy fighting that War of Ideas.

21. Internet Friend  •  Jul 31, 2006 @3:02 pm
    

    I don’t know who the fuck Steyn is, but he’s clearly got a hard-on for Bush in his cheerleader costume. Cheerleaders miles from the action as important as those in the action. That’s rich. Christ, is this guy retarded?

22. darrelplant  •  Jul 31, 2006 @3:14 pm
    

    I think he should hop the next flight over to Iraq and go around telling the soldiers carrying machine guns there that they’re not doing their job right and that they’re a bunch of whiny pussies who can’t whip the Iraqis. That would fix the problem, I think, and I doubt he’d be publishing anymore columns along these lines.

23. harry "snapper" organs  •  Jul 31, 2006 @8:17 pm
    

    To quote Jesus’ General, “They also serve who only sit and wank.”

24. erinyes  •  Jul 31, 2006 @9:28 pm
    

    Actually Maha, comment 14 is not far from the truth. There are many service men and women serving in Iraq in order to get their citizenship. Most come from the Dominican republic, Mexico, and Central America.I commented at Antiwar.com over 2 years ago that a likely pool of conscripts exists in exactly those locations. a pool which would tend to not inflame middle America and avoid a draft. No doubt many are mercenaries which don’t need to be reported as KIA or POW.I do think he was being sarcastic, it is what what it is…..I believe this was is far dirtier than we can imagine.

25. VotingVet  •  Aug 1, 2006 @3:45 pm
    

    I agree it’s painful to talk about little chickenhawk nothings like this. But somebody has to drag them out of the shadows into the light of day where we can all laugh at their hypocrisy and folly. But it’s really hard to laugh for all the choking I find myself doing! That this little pisant would criticize the troops on the ground from his desk 10,000 miles away from danger — and insist that his pen-pushing “role” is somehow significant, equal to or even superior to theirs– is as outrageous as it is typical of the whole rats’ nest of sissy-hawk neoconservatives, from the Commander in Chief on down. Would that an army of the dead would haunt their dreams and leave them all lying in a bed/puddle of their own excreta.

2 Trackbacks

• Jul 31, 2006: Crooks and Liars » Mike’s Blog Round up
• Oct 29, 2006: The Mahablog » Facts and Fictions, Part II