home

Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offensive In Iraq

The U.S. today launched a big offensive against insurgents in Iraq -- the largest since the 2003 invasion. Knights Ridder reported the other day that airstrikes risk civilian casualties. [hat tip Daily Kos.]

The Senate today passed a spending bill that increases the national debt to $9 trillion, in large part to fund the war.

It passed hours before the House was expected to approve another $91 billion to fund the war in Iraq and provide more aid to hurricane victims.

"War, Children, is just a shot away." [Rolling Stones, Gimme Shelter, listen to clip here.]

< Thursday Open Thread | Defense Files Objection to Reconsideration of Moussaoui Ruling >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#1)
    by desertswine on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 09:50:28 AM EST
    I have to believe that this "operation" is designed solely to boost President Dimwit's tanking approval poll numbers. Nothing like a little blood and enemy dead bodies to get the dwindling faithful crowing about their leader again.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#2)
    by Dadler on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 09:54:53 AM EST
    If it doesn't work once, twice, a zillion times, then by all means try it again. What's a few more dead Iraqi civilians? The definition of crazy. This will go on and on and on....

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#3)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 10:00:57 AM EST
    desertswine writes:
    I have to believe
    No, you don't "have to" believe. No one is forcing you. You may believe that it is a "wag the dog" operation, just as the Repubs believed Clinton's missle strikes on the day of his impeachment was designed to focus attention away from the impeachment. But you don't "have to." dadler - The reports are that this is an Iraqi operation, based on intelligence reports. Would you let the terrorists operate unchallenged?

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#4)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 10:22:37 AM EST
    9 trillion in the hole now...wow. How long before it hits a googleplex?

    Jim, why do you believe every word that comes out of this administration? Don't you think that as citizens we need to question and hold our leaders accountable? Do you really think that this administration has done a good job implementing the invasion and occupation of Iraq?

    This makes it quite obvious to me the Military is getting desperate. When they resort to Destroying the village to save it they are running out of options. It was a tactic used in Vietnam. It offers only a hollow P.R. victory. It didn't work then and it won't work in Iraq now. In fact it will just create more insurgents from the survivors of the assault.

    "The Senate today passed a spending bill that increases the national debt to $9 trillion..." The mountain of debt that Bush is piling on our backs pales in comparison with the moral abyss he's thrown us into.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#8)
    by scarshapedstar on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 10:31:19 AM EST
    You tell 'em, Jim. Call up these traitor, too, and let them know what the facts are.
    Within the military, the prospect of using airpower as a substitute for American troops on the ground has caused great unease. For one thing, Air Force commanders, in particular, have deep-seated objections to the possibility that Iraqis eventually will be responsible for target selection. "Will the Iraqis call in air strikes in order to snuff rivals, or other warlords, or to snuff members of your own sect and blame someone else?" another senior military planner now on assignment in the Pentagon asked. "Will some Iraqis be targeting on behalf of Al Qaeda, or the insurgency, or the Iranians?"
    They'll all be targeting on behalf of freedom, right, Jim? And if something goes wrong it will be the MSM's fault, for reporting it. Quantum theory, you dig?
    This military planner added that even today, with Americans doing the targeting, "there is no sense of an air campaign, or a strategic vision. We are just whacking targets - it's a reversion to the Stone Age. There's no operational art. That's what happens when you give targeting to the Army - they hit what the local commander wants to hit." One senior Pentagon consultant I spoke to said he was optimistic that "American air will immediately make the Iraqi Army that much better." But he acknowledged that he, too, had concerns about Iraqi targeting. "We have the most expensive eyes in the sky right now," the consultant said. "But a lot of Iraqis want to settle old scores. Who is going to have authority to call in air strikes? There's got to be a behavior-based rule."
    What's this "Pentagon", anyway? Probably run by Michael Moore.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#9)
    by Al on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 10:33:11 AM EST
    debbiehamil:
    Jim, why do you believe every word that comes out of this administration?
    Probably because of contractual obligations, I would imagine.

    JimakaPPJ writes:
    No, you don't "have to" believe. No one is forcing you. You may believe that it is a "wag the dog" operation, just as the Repubs believed Clinton's missle strikes on the day of his impeachment was designed to focus attention away from the impeachment. But you don't "have to."
    But Jimmy, a reasoning man "must" believe because there is _no_ other logical reason. and:
    The reports are that this is an Iraqi operation, based on intelligence reports. Would you let the terrorists operate unchallenged?
    Jimmy: 1. This is _not_ an Iraqi operation. No US commander would _ever_ take orders from a non-US source. Iraqi intelligence may be used to provide "targets" but as to the disposition of the US troops, you are quite wacked to think they are following Iraqi commands. 2. I guess it depends on who one considers terrorists. So far, the US terrorists have been operating but challenged by the Iraqi freedom-fighters. If I thought the Iraqi freedom-fighters were targeting neo-cons, I would work to ensure that, in fact, the freedom-fighters were "unchallenged" as well as help them with the precision of their strikes to preclude "collateral damage", unlike the US terrorists who seem to average close to 9 innocent killed for every killed freedom-fighter.

    Sky-Ho Now there is a good example of outstanding liberal values or a lack there of. "Iraq freedom fighters" must consider other Iraqis to be more of a danger to Iraq then the US terrorists, even though most are from Iran not Iraq. So much for them being "Iraqi freedom fighters", but I don't think details are important to you.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 12:56:14 PM EST
    Sky-Ho writes:
    If I thought the Iraqi freedom-fighters were targeting neo-cons, I would work to ensure that, in fact, the freedom-fighters were "unchallenged" as well as help them with the precision of their strikes
    Hooey, your stated desire to help the terrorists is noted and not unexpected. As Will Rogers, a noted American pundit and a man of great wit said, all I know is what I read in the newspapers. (Since you obviously are not an American since you state a desire to help the enemy, I thought I would explain who he was.)

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#13)
    by Edger on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 01:04:51 PM EST
    Steven Sanderson:
    The mountain of debt that Bush is piling on our backs pales in comparison with the moral abyss he's thrown us into.
    Kind of like blowing their reputation with their creditors, isn't it? What's going to cost more? Rebuilding the reputation? Or the misery the debt is piling on the backs of generations to come?

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#14)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 01:06:46 PM EST
    debbie - I neither believe or disbelieve 90% of what I hear/read. You should try to take the same approach rather than immediately yelling "liar!" Al - Well, at least I can get a contract.... I don't have to give my efforts away. ;-) BTW - Do you really think your opinions are so important that the Repubs would hire someone to refute? ;-) ;-)

    The enemy is the one who stole the election, lied to start a war that murdered American and Iraqis, so he could steal oil well.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#16)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 01:09:08 PM EST
    et al - For you folks who have suddenly discovered the National Debt, please be aware of this fact. You may send money to the US Treasury at anytime. Please feel free to send as much as you desire. No amount is too small, or too large.

    The enemy is the one who stole the election, lied to start a war that murdered American and Iraqis, so he could steal oil wells.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#18)
    by libdevil on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 01:15:25 PM EST
    Is that the new Republican budget plan, Jim, panhandling on behalf of the Department of the Treasury?

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#19)
    by jondee on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 01:20:14 PM EST
    Is it all right if we just put it in an offshore bank account and make periodic investments in cheap Chinese labor? It will benefit all of us eventually; St. Ron came to me in a dream and told me it would.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#20)
    by Peaches on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 01:21:58 PM EST
    9 Trillion in debt. If you write that out there are 12 zeros behind that 9. Interest on the debt? I am just doing back of the envelope calculations here. But, at 3 percent, that gives us 270 billion in annual interest charges on this debt. That is absurd. What am I doing wrong? Can't be right, can it? Let's see. We had a surplus. A surplus which could have been used to pay down on a debt of about 6 trillion. Right? or was it 5 trillion, what ever, it was smaller. Then we thougth, or some people thought, we should have tax cuts because of projected surpluses far into the future. Tax cuts go through and suddenly we are running deficits again. hmmm. Then the deficits reach record levels and some people decide it might be a good idea to make these cuts permanent, all the while increasing spending. well, now, this is strange. The last time we had these record deficits was when we had the great communicator in the oval office who was suppose to be fiscally conservative. Then, we get the supposedly liberal presidency of Clinton and he not only balances the budget but starts running surpluses that can pay down the debt. Whoops, not so fast. The next great conservative to come along since old Ronnie boy, suddenly runs deficits around a half trillion a year until we are at 9 trillion in debt that we are paying a whopping amount of interest just to finance it each year. What the Hell happened? Oh yeah, 9/11. Sorry forgot. Spend away and cut those taxes on the richest Americans. We have an economy with the resiliency to overcome. No worries.

    Let the repos hold a fundraiser to deal with the deficit and the national debt. That's the only thing they're any good at. Lord knows they can't Govern effectively. It's their debt anyway. Let'em have Pat Boone and Anita Bryant Sing. Pat Robertson and Falwell can offer up some racist, anti-Semitic, exclusionary, God Bless Exxon prayer.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#22)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 01:54:11 PM EST
    Al, You beat me to it. Sky-Ho, Is this your first fascist sliming? Meet PPJ. He likes to hang with "terrorist enablers". Scar, After reading your 11:31 post I couldn't get the image out of my mind of the movie "Catch-22", where Milo has the airbase bombed by our own guys to make good on a money-losing deal with the the Germans.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#23)
    by Al on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 01:56:02 PM EST
    Jim:
    Al - Well, at least I can get a contract.... I don't have to give my efforts away. ;-)
    I still have a soul, Jim, and it's not for hire.
    BTW - Do you really think your opinions are so important that the Repubs would hire someone to refute? ;-) ;-)
    No, but I do think you are a bunch of paranoid freaks, so it wouldn't surprise me. And honestly, for someone to systematically follow a blog, posting the official talking points on just about every thread, just to get beaten up all the time, you would have to be a fool not to try to get paid at least.

    BTW - Do you really think your opinions are so important that the Repubs would hire someone to refute?
    ;-) ;-) Do you really think we think they'd pay the likes o'you for your services?

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#25)
    by Peaches on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 02:38:29 PM EST
    The old man advises, tongue in cheek of course,
    et al - For you folks who have suddenly discovered the National Debt, please be aware of this fact. You may send money to the US Treasury at anytime. Please feel free to send as much as you desire. No amount is too small, or too large.
    Of course, he isn't serious. I noticed a discussion on the open thread today about the differences in income btw the average factory worker and CEO's. that someone linked to the Economist and got JP and Jim all bent out of shape. It is not east to get a grasp on this subject because the amounts of money are so huge. Once you get to a million, most people just shrug their shoulders and say, "a lot of money." The differences btw one million and one billion is more than a lot of money. and the differences btw a billion and a trillion are even more difficult to comprehend. If you haven't heard of the L-Curve, I suggest you take a look to get a real grasp of these numbers and what is meant when we talk about giving tax breaks to the richest Americans. Form the link
    The US population is represented along the length of the football field, arranged in order of income. Median US family income (the family at the 50 yard line) is ~$40,000 (a stack of $100 bills 1.6 inches high.) --The family on the 95 yard line earns about $100,000 per year, a stack of $100 bills about 4 inches high. --At the 99 yard line the income is about $300,000, a stack of $100 bills about a foot high. --The curve reaches $1 million (a 40 inch high stack of $100 bills) one foot from the goal line. --From there it keeps going up...it goes up 50 km (~30 miles) on this scale!


    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#26)
    by cpinva on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 02:43:09 PM EST
    yep, and that last "shock and awe" proved so successful. people like jim are blinded by.....what? their loyalties? hopes, fears, aspirations? beats the heck out of me. ignorance perhaps? as jim is taken in shackles to his small cell in gitmo, he will, like a mad robespierre being led to the guillotine, still be shouting his praises for the "revolution".

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#27)
    by jondee on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 02:58:58 PM EST
    Anything to get back at "the left" that poked holes in his Terry and the Pirates cold war fantasies in the sixties.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#28)
    by desertswine on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 03:16:31 PM EST
    Thanks for that link, Peaches, very informative.
    I am opposing a social order in which it is possible for one man who does absolutely nothing that is useful to amass a fortune of hundreds of millions of dollars, while millions of men and women who work all the days of their lives secure barely enough for a wretched existence. - Eugene Debs


    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#29)
    by John Mann on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 03:41:46 PM EST
    As Will Rogers, a noted American pundit and a man of great wit said, all I know is what I read in the newspapers.
    Too bad President Bush and his gang don't follow his example.

    Too bad President Bush and his gang don't follow his example.
    I always wonder what Ben Franklin would think of a President who takes pride in never reading a newspaper.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 05:33:51 PM EST
    Jondee - I would never offer you advice about your money. But I would say if you have taken some of it and invested in an IRA, etc., you wouldn't be so envious. Peaches - Please, don't misquote me. All I noted was a distrust of anything Bill Moyers is involved with and noted some questions regarding the methodology of the comparisons, concluding with a comment that maybe they do and maybe they don't. Why does the Left like to misquote? Desertswine - There are many countries that are much closer to Debs' economic theories than the US. If you find them attractive, why not emigrate rather than complain? Al - How do you know you have a soul? You think, therefore you are? Beaten up? Are you so timid and insecure that you must always have a choir around you? Al baby, Eagles don't flock. charlie - I didn't make the claim. Al did. What is the matter? Going so fast you can't keep up? Typical. Peaches - Not tongue in cheek at all. If you feel like the government needs more money, feel free to send it some. Trust me. They'll take it. Che - Quoting what someone wrote is sliming them? Wow! scar writes:
    Quantum theory, you dig?
    I dig that you know almost nothing about the military, military tactics or strategy. But don't worry. MoveOn will be posting what you are supposed to say.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#32)
    by Sailor on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 05:54:54 PM EST
    Every line of ppj's post was a personal insult to fellow commentators. Somebody please tell me why he is still allowed to post here?

    Peaches - Please, don't misquote me. All I noted was a distrust of anything Bill Moyers is involved with and noted some questions regarding the methodology of the comparisons, concluding with a comment that maybe they do and maybe they don't.
    Why does the Left like to misquote?
    Gee, were you told you had exclusive territorial rights, jim? That is rich comin' from the likes o' you. Maybe they do and maybe they don't is pretty definitive by your standards though.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#34)
    by John Mann on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 06:07:17 PM EST
    Every line of ppj's post was a personal insult to fellow commentators. Somebody please tell me why he is still allowed to post here?
    Just a wild guess, but perhaps he pays for his seat on the bus.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#35)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 06:18:46 PM EST
    Since you obviously are not an American since you state a desire to help the enemy That wasn't Sky-Ho who wrote that. You debate like Cheney hunts.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#36)
    by Edger on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 06:57:47 PM EST
    Slightly OT, but closely related to this threads topic (and what isn't in the ME these days?) The Italian adnkronos international is reporting today that Al-Sadr has established a shadow government in Sadr City in Baghdad. Curious that the US offensive was lauched today. No civil war? Dream on...
    Erbil, 16 March (AKI) - A Kurdish source in Baghdad has told a Kurdish national daily that the Mahdi Army, the militia of radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, " has set up a shadow government in Sadr City in the centre of Baghdad". The source told the Aso daily: "this group was tasked with carrying out the affairs of the city in the place of the Iraqi government and institutions." The source explained that the Mahdi Army, accused of kidnappings and sectarian killings, has transformed the rundown Sadr city into an independent district with its security forces and its own courts which do not only judge local residents but also Shiites from other areas of the capital. More...


    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 07:23:36 PM EST
    Che - Actually that was a response from me commenting on: Posted by Sky-Ho March 16, 2006 12:09 PM In which he wrote:
    If I thought the Iraqi freedom-fighters were targeting neo-cons, I would work to ensure that, in fact, the freedom-fighters were "unchallenged" as well as help them with the precision of their strikes
    Now, in my Posted by JimakaPPJ March 16, 2006 01:56 PM response I used an old Will Rogers line... Then I realized I had to explain who Will Rogers was. Because:
    Since you obviously are not an American since you state a desire to help the enemy
    Che. Please keep up.

    Now, in my Posted by JimakaPPJ March 16, 2006 01:56 PM response I used an old Will Rogers line... Then I realized I had to explain who Will Rogers was. Because: Since you obviously are not an American since you state a desire to help the enemy Che. Please keep up.
    Well, you are plungin' pretty fast, Jim. And there's no need to drag Will Rogers into it. After all, he did say, "I don't belong to any organized Political Party, I'm a Democrat." You can look it up. Ya know, you don't always have to make it so easy, Jim. People will think you're takin' a dive, like your buddies.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#39)
    by Edger on Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 07:54:19 PM EST
    That was hilarious, Charlie. ;-) Skewered and roasted over a hot fire. Wingnuts... Mmmmm!

    It's obvious that Will Rogers never met Jim!!!

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#42)
    by Aaron on Fri Mar 17, 2006 at 01:27:55 AM EST
    Wow, what an impressive offensive. Up to this point there have been no casualties, US or Iraqi, no one has been captured. Could it be? Not a shot fired? The 101st Airborne might as well be on maneuvers, good news for them. They're probably a lot safer out there than anybody in Baghdad right now. I'd definitely rather be flying over the countryside somewhere in Tikrit 10,000 feet in the air. Anybody wonder why there's no journalists out with the troops? Raise any flags? Apparently this is the Bush administration's latest political imperative, launch an offensive against a force that doesn't exist. Good PR and a low likelihood of incurring casualties.

    dadler - The reports are that this is an Iraqi operation, based on intelligence reports. Would you let the terrorists operate unchallenged?
    Well that's good enough for me. Jim, if you want to open a daycare center, you don't put down Susan Smith and Andrea Yates as character references. Just a suggestion.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#44)
    by kipling on Fri Mar 17, 2006 at 04:25:50 AM EST
    This BBC reporter is sceptical about this, to say the least.

    It might help if you had some idea of what you were criticizing. This was termed an "Air Assault" and involved the 101st Airborne (key word there) division, along with a slightly larger contingent of Iraqi troops. The assault was an airborne landing of troops to look for weapons - not a bombing campaign by the air force.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 17, 2006 at 07:20:04 AM EST
    charlie - Scroll up and read JR's comments. Aaron writes:
    Anybody wonder why there's no journalists out with the troops? Raise any flags?
    Maybe they didn't want the journalists to know in advance? As you, I'm just wondering.... Araon - Have you rode in a helicopter at 10,000 feet? charlie - Why don't you dig up Rogers and tell him PPJ was a Demo...at one time.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#47)
    by Peaches on Fri Mar 17, 2006 at 07:32:37 AM EST
    Peaches - Please, don't misquote me
    Which quote are you refering to? I usually put quotes in blockquotes using TL's toolbars. I don't want to pick on you, old man, but it is hard talking to someone who doesn't have all of his marbles. Do you know what a quote is?

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#49)
    by desertswine on Fri Mar 17, 2006 at 08:14:17 AM EST
    Every line of ppj's post was a personal insult to fellow commentators. Somebody please tell me why he is still allowed to post here?
    Just a wild guess, but perhaps he pays for his seat on the bus.
    Correctamundo.

    charlie - Why don't you dig up Rogers and tell him PPJ was a Demo...at one time.
    To what end? Haven't you slandered the poor man enough? Nobody gives a damn in this life. Why nag folks in the next? He says you're worse than that freakin' computer wizard on TV.

    Just a wild guess, but perhaps he pays for his seat on the bus. Correctamundo.
    Speakin' of which, did anyone catch the clueless cracker on C-SPAN'S WJ this AM who blamed MLK and that "lady on the bus" for "teachin' all the Blacks to hate Whites. 'Cause that's the cause of all these problems in Iraq." Swear to God. 50 years down the road and this is what we get for bushworld.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#52)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 17, 2006 at 12:48:52 PM EST
    Peaches wrote:
    I noticed a discussion on the open thread today about the differences in income btw the average factory worker and CEO's. that someone linked to the Economist and got JP and Jim all bent out of shape.
    If you want to parse what the meaning of is, "is," I will describe that as a mischaracterization. charlie - Quoting someone is slandering them???? That's a stretch, even for you, don't you think?

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#53)
    by Peaches on Fri Mar 17, 2006 at 01:11:33 PM EST
    Old Man, You said and I quote:
    Peaches - Please, don't misquote me...Why does the Left like to misquote?
    Who is making the mischaracterization here? Think hard,now. I know it takes some effort.

    Ah, but that's the point, Jim. You don't quote. You misquote or selectively quote as much or more than anyone and everyone else you constantly accuse of doing to your self-proclaimed "brilliant" blather. The only thing more towering than your complete and utter hypocrisy is your consistent and complete intellectual dishonesty and utter contempt for the facts and/or evidence, in yet another futile attempt to buttress your progressively more ludicrous assertions on behalf of your hero that even he's come clean on to some degree and taken some level of responsibility for. It's been three years since the Iraq Invasion. The number of people who think it was a good idea has dropped from 68 percent to 37 percent. Ouch. You can't blame that on the Media. You can't blame that on the sample size or the wording of the question. And 31 percent is just a wee bit outside the margin of error so don't even bother with that song and dance. You've got no bullets left in the chamber, Jim. With respect to Iraq, The Bush Presidency/insurgency is in its last throes. It's down to you dead enders. And outside of Iraq, there is no Bush Presidency. The most-recent CNN/USA/GALLUP Poll has 77 percent figuring Iraq's either in or headed for Civil War. There's 17 percent who buy your spiel. Yeah, sure, must be the way they phrased the question.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#55)
    by jondee on Fri Mar 17, 2006 at 03:35:43 PM EST
    Charlie - Dont stir him up; he's having his quiet time with his plastic army men.

    Now he's talkin' about himself in the third person in reference to Will Rogers. Even a fictional reference. The dude needs to count himself. He won't need the calculator.

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#57)
    by roy on Fri Mar 17, 2006 at 03:46:09 PM EST
    Charlie, I'm confused. Is the fact that Jim's never called his own comments "brilliant" ironic, or poetic?

    Re: Shock and Awe Redux: U.S. Launches Huge Offens (none / 0) (#58)
    by Aaron on Fri Mar 17, 2006 at 04:46:27 PM EST
    JimakaPPJ I know I can outfly you sucka. Let's go heads up in F-16s, one Sidewinder apiece. Mano-a-mano Settle this thing right now. You know what I call naval aviators don't you... target practice. I'll flame your ass just like I do hear. F--king with you aside, I must say that I'm impressed by your commitment to keep returning to this site. Since you're mostly alone around here I'd say that takes some measure of courage and fortitude. I have to give you some grudging respect for that at least. That's how I know you'll take me up on my challenge, just name the airfield and I'll be there with bells on. But I definitely think you could do a better job of representing the conservative viewpoint. I see way too much tit-for-tat and arguing of semantics in discussions here. I'd comment more often if I saw a greater preponderance of substantive discussion. As far as blog commenting goes, I have to say it's pretty much lightweight stuff around here especially given that this is a law blog. I comment on a couple of conservative blogs where the discussion threads are a hell of a lot more interesting than what I usually see here. So from now on I'm going to expect better of you, at least if you want to hear from me. And I know you do.

    Charlie,
    I'm confused. Is the fact that Jim's never called his own comments "brilliant" ironic, or poetic?
    Well, were that the case, it would be merciful and a blessing.

    If you want to parse what the meaning of is, "is," I will describe that as a mischaracterization.
    Well, at least you're not still parsing what the meaning of WMD is. Saints be Praised!