You’re right. This really isn’t funny.
And to think that this dweeb was the so-called “Leader of the Free World” for eight years. . . . 
[/quote]
Hahaha!!!
I did say “probably”.
The great part about your joke is that it deliberately plays against type with its line at the bottom.
You’re right. This really isn’t funny.
And to think that this dweeb was the so-called “Leader of the Free World” for eight years. . . . [/quote]
Hahaha!!!
I did say “probably”.
The great part about your joke is that it deliberately plays against type with its line at the bottom.[/quote]
Plus, it’s got that smiley smacking its head against a wall.
Or, I should write, it includes a secondary comedic aspect in the form of a universally recognized icon engaged in a situation that complements - almost as though it were in parenthesis - the primary instance of humor, and suggests that beneath the narrator’s wit lies a degree of frustration with the object visually presented, but which the narrator feels must too be presented in a humorous manner.
Cold Front, the observation that the Iraq invasion’s real purpose probably involves oil and/or Israel is hardly unique to me. You seem very quick to dismiss both possibilities–ridiculing them without really addressing them. I wonder why? Some sort of emotional involvement on your part, perhaps?
I’m too lazy to go dig out the link to my patented Middle East Peace Plan, but here it is again:
(1) Let the Jews divide their country any way they please. Ditto for water rights, etc.
(2) Then let the Palestinians pick which half they want.
Now why does such an even-handed proposal (after all, their populations are about the same) sound so obviously like a joke? Because we have come to expect–and accept–that one side will screw the other…?
Well, all those chickens are coming home to roost. And THAT’S what 911 was all about.
You’re kidding, right? You’re the very first person I’ve ever seen make a connection between the invasion, oil, and Israel. 
As I said earlier, your little Hollywood screenplay doesn’t work as well when it contradicts itself. Even modern audiences accustomed to great leaps have their limits in the suspension of disbelief. You can’t, on the one hand, claim the U.S. invaded Iraq to push its own economic agenda and then, on the other hand, claim American Jews are responsible for the invasion as they want to push an Israeli agenda, one that’s in conflict with U.S. aims. So which is it? Did the U.S. invade for itself or for Israel?
No, I just think yours is an idiotic argument, nothing more than a prettied-up rehash of the standard leftist cliche. You’ve shown the ability to write solid prose, but ironically you can’t fashion an original argument to save your life. Do you think you’re clever for pointing out that since America has Jews in its government, they therefore must be directing Israel’s agenda through American policy? Do you have any proof for this claim beyond the broadest sweeping statements that basically do nothing than smear U.S. public servants for their Jewish ancestry?
You say your claims are not really PC, but they are far more than that: they are anti-Semitic – a recycling of old claims against Jews on the basis of no fucking proof whatsoever. You apparently don’t know how to make an argument. You seem to think that some related themes (Jews and Israel, for example) adhere into something that supports your point without further need of proof.
As for your economic reasoning, it’s just as ridiculous. I dispensed with the general argument about oil and the Iraqi invasion at length in another thread. (Why is it, by the way, that economic illiterates always put such faith in their economic arguments? They seem to think that making such arguments shows them to be sophisticated thinkers, as if they are not the kind of person fooled by basic arguments put forth on behalf of security or democratic ideals, when it’s quite obvious that the almighty dollar is the reason for everything.)
Yes, as you and everyone on the planet knows, Iraq has oil; but Iraq had oil in 1991 when the first Gulf war ended; it had oil in 1998 when Clinton ordered Desert Fox; it’s always had oil. That condition never dictated a U.S. invasion before 9-11, even when the U.S. had an opportunity to do so. Iraq sold oil to the U.S. during the 90s under the U.N. oil for food program. But if it had refused to sell oil to the U.S., and sold only to Europeans, since oil is a fungible good, it wouldn’t have had much effect on oil markets. Even a long-term embargo by Saddam on the sale of Iraqi oil hurts himself more than it would others. How does he build his palaces? How does he acquire weapons? Iraq has a good deal of oil reserves, but as a percentage of the world oil market, its sale of oil doesn’t amount to much more than a couple of percentage points every year.
[quote=“Screaming Jesus”]I’m too lazy to go dig out the link to my patented Middle East Peace Plan, but here it is again:
(1) Let the Jews divide their country any way they please. Ditto for water rights, etc.
(2) Then let the Palestinians pick which half they want.
Now why does such an even-handed proposal (after all, their populations are about the same) sound so obviously like a joke? Because we have come to expect–and accept–that one side will screw the other…?[/quote]
Get your head out of Never Never Land, Peter Pan. Have you ever owned a single piece of property or are you some itinerant banjo player making the tour through Asia’s subways panhandling for a living?
One doesn’t arbitrarily divide in half a huge section of real estate that literally millions of people have some physical connection to like it’s a piece of bread to be divided in half between two squabbling kids.
I’ve never heard something so stupid in my life. If someone had said, “Hey, I’ve got an idea! Why don’t they flip a coin for who gets what!” I wouldn’t have been more shocked at the ignorance of such a proposal.
Here we go with another cliche. Have you had a single original thought go through that mush you call a brain, even if just by accident?
ColdFront, The connection between the Iraq invasion and Israel has been made before. Read some of Justin Raimondo’s articles at antiwar.com. Pat Buchanon also makes the connection.[/url]
Ishmael, for the love of God, I know perfectly well the argument of a connection between Israel and the invasion of Iraq has been made and made and made and made. That was my point. Do you not understand the uses of irony?
Here’s a simple challenge: if you believe American Jews in the U.S. government are pimping for Israel, supply some proof. Proof is not a website that makes the same tenuous connection that a half-dozen people here in Forumosa have already made: that there are Jews in the U.S. government and Jews also live in Israel. Proof is not the contradictory screed Screaming Jesus posted describing U.S. economic motivations for invading Iraq and then two paragraphs later moved on to say the invasion was the result of the U.S. unwittingly doing Israel’s bidding.
Name a Jewish U.S. policymaker (or policymakers) in position of power. Describe how he (or they) manipulated the process to ensure Israel’s wishes were taken into account during policy planning in U.S. government meetings. Describe how his (or their) wishes took priority in U.S. government meetings that shaped the U.S. decision to go to war in a critical way and how, in the absence of these Jewish policymakers, the U.S. would not have gone to war. If you can’t provide this sort of proof, then your argument is a sack of anti-Semitic shit.
Cold Front, my post was merely a plug for Justin Raimondo and antiwar.com. Some of the collectivist hacks who post here should read his articles before posting on political topics.
I’ve never heard of Justin Raimondo, although I’m aggressively suspicious of anyone who thinks the U.S. invaded Iraq for Israel’s sake.
Why don’t you post a specific essay that Raimondo has written – one that you think is of high quality? I’ll read it and report back here on what I think of his arguments.
Cold Front, Anyone tying Israel to the American invasion is automatically branded as being anti-semitic. You have done the same with SJ. Where is the logic in that? Question, are you a Jew? If not, why are you so sensitive?
No, I’m not a Jew, and I’ve already supplied the argument for why such sloppy accusations are anti-Semitic. You are accusing American citizens of doing the bidding of a foreign country with no basis for your claims other than their ancestry.
Now what part of that logic can you not follow?
The reason I dislike the implication is because it’s stupid – it’s prima facie stupid – and I hate stupidity. If you’re going to talk about Iraq, Israel, and the Middle East, know something about what you’re talking about.
The U.S. invaded Iraq for its own interests, primarily… no, almost exclusively because of its security interests. Since 9-11, the U.S. government has made a public policy decision that it will deal with potential threats to the U.S. earlier and in a more direct manner than it had previously. It will, as President Bush said, not wait until attacks on U.S. soil before taking action against those who threaten American lives and interests.
This is a simple formula. So simple that only an idiot would be suspicious of it. You have to develop some convoluted story such as 9-11 was a Mossad plot or that Jewish media interests have directed the general debate that forced Iraq to the top of the U.S. foreign policy agenda in order to not believe it. In any case, you need a good deal of ignorance to make such a claim.
Now, is Israel helped by Saddam’s fall? Yes, no doubt about it. But that is proof for nothing other it is possible to help yourself and help your friends at the same time. The Israelis would have been helped more, however, if the U.S. had attacked Iran or Syria, both of whom have a far more lengthy and sustained record in financing terror attack against Israelis than does Saddam.
Cold Front, here are some articles for your perusal. www.amconmag.com103_24_03/cover.html, if you are a neocon, which I suspect that you are, don’t bother.
Ishmael –
Your second link doesn’t work.
Why would it make any difference what my political affiliation is? A good argument is a good argument. Period.
You seem caught up in identifying who I am. “Are you a Jew?” “If you’re a neocon…don’t bother.” Those should be as relevant to any argument you make as the fact that you appear not to be a Jew and not to be a neocon.
Cold Front, amconmag.com/103_24_03/cover.html I ask because who else but a neocon or a Jew would support the war?
Were you just born yesterday? How about a majority of Americans? How about large majorities in Congress? Are you under the impression that Jews or Neocons make up anywhere even close to a majority in either the general U.S. population or the U.S. Congress?
Jews make up about 2 to 3% of the U.S. population. Neocons (those who aren’t Jews) make up a bit more. Obviously the support for the war comes from a much, much broader segment of the U.S. population than either of those two groups could supply.
I’ve read the article “Israel’s Amen Corner” linked by Ismael. It’s a bunch of garbage spouted by some crank anarcho-libertarian. I’ll comment on it in detail later tonight.
How much longer is the world going to have to put up with this “Remember 911” rubbish?
Do the Brits stop and remember every IRA bomb?
Do the Lebanese stop and remember every Israeli air strike?
Do the Israelis stop and remember every suicide bomb?
Do the Spanish stop and remember every Basque bomb?
Do the Georgians stop and remember every Soviet mortar shell?
Do the Hungarians and Czechs stop and remember every Soviet tank shell?
Do Berliners stop to remember every Cold War bullet?
Do the El Salvadorians, Hondurans, Guatemalans and Nicaraguans stop to remember every CIA bullet?
Do the Russians stop to remember every Chechen bomb?
Do the Greeks stop to remember every Turkish shell? – And visa versa.
Do the Vietnamese stop to remember every napalm strike?
Do the Yemenites stop to remember every Egyptian chemical attack?
Do the Afghanis stop to remember every stray bullet?
Do the Germans stop and remember every Barder Meinhoff blast?
Do the Italians stop to remember every Red Brigade bomb?
Do the French stop and remember every Nazi barrage?
Do the people of Dresden stop to remember every Allied bomb?
And so on and so on and so on …
Oh! And lest we forget, do the Icelandic peoples stop and remember every Cod War?
Do the above-mentioned peoples shove the pointless deaths of so many (fish included) down the world’s throat year after year?
Get over it please.
Speaking as someone who believes that Palestine should be returned to its rightful owners (which pretty much blocks me from being either Jewish or a “neocon”), I think anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together would support the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.
Ishmael earlier linked to this article – Israel’s Amen Corner – when I asked him to provide what he thought was a good article by Justin Raimondo claiming the U.S. invaded Iraq for Israel’s sake.
Actually, Raimondo’s essay makes a far broader claim. He argues that U.S. foreign policy for the entire war on terror is in the service of Israel.
Unlike Ishmael, who seems to have a thing for Jews, Raimondo doesn’t really blame them as much as he does two other groups:[quote]The old-line Zionist organizations in America are one component of Israel