Bingo!

Again, and Again, and Again.

But really, you've hit a big problem on the head. The bulk of the remaining war supporteers, at least among the online political battling crowd, really _do_ believe that not carrying giant puppets is a commendable decision they have made, a weakness that others have fallen prey to. What can you do with a mentality like that?

What can you do with a mentality like that?

Hit it on the head.

With a big giant puppet.

Again and again and again.

While I feel very self-righteous about being... well, correct on the matter of war with Iraq, it's the sense that there is no accountability for being incorrect. And being wrong on catastrophic human levels (and not to mention financial ones). And yet, despite wrongness, grown men and women all over the country don't seem to give a damn or choose to ignore this fuckup. And every other fuckup.

I'm all for second chances. Even second second chances. But when you lose the ability to be trusted and followed, you don't start where you left off with that second chance.

Moral of the story: well put, Mr. 'er

why do hippies get a bad rap about anything? when have we ever been wrong about war? wtf? i never understood how being a liberal ever became a bad thing, and how did hippes become discredited? what group is so fucking superior to hippies? some of us are the greatest people on earth, and I'd take a random sampling over any other group you might posit. fuck that. if the hippies weren't relegated to the unserious or the inconsequential due entirely to an aversion to aggrandizing power, the world would be a better place. it seems to me that everyone else in the fucking world could learn a great deal from the ethos of hippies.

Hallelujah, brother! Right fucking on!

The reason hippies have been so comprehensively smeared is that they stood up to the establishment, they told the warmongers to get fucked, they told the money fascists to get fucked, they told the mealy-mouthed apologist straights to get a spine!

They also advocated sustainable lifestyle, ridiculed ignorant poseur consumers who couldn't wait to but the next issue of shit that was trendy, pointed out the disgusting philosophy of corporations to the general populace (work, consume, die) and exposed the ridiculous world view of the American political establishment - "We're superior, we do what God tells us, we support fascist dictators because they aren't communist, if you don't like it you're a communist and we can kill you."

If Bush is the ultimate result of American politics give me a hippie anytime.

Hippies remind the straights how much they give up when they sell out. There's gotta be some reason for putting on the suit and tie, eh?

And how many of those having regrets about Iraq are still proud of supporting Afghanistan? (Are you among them, Mr. Liberal?) I mean, those bases were training terrorists to attack us, we're they? We had to get Bin Laden, didn't we? And the Afghani people are liberated now, aren't they?

Let me start off by saying that I am not necessarily advocating an attack on Iran at this point. But I would like to point out that just because someone was wrong about attacking country A, does not mean that they are wrong about attacking country B.

We could be looking at a "Boy Who Cried Wolf" scenario, where the architects of our invasion of Iraq have spent their credibility, leading people like Belle to dismiss them out of hand when they call for invasion of Iran, even if there actually is a more compelling case for invasion this time around.

Indeed, it seems to me that a lot of the issues with Iraq are different when it comes to Iran: WMD's? Check; Iran will have the ability to build nukes in a matter of years. Threats of mass destruction? Check; see any Ahmadinejad speech about Israel. Fractious ethno-religious groups making formation of a post-invasion government difficult? I don't think so; at least not as much so as in Iraq.

Again, I'm not saying we should start bombing. I'm just saying we should judge the need for military action on the merits, and not on the past track records of particular pundits.

the architects of our invasion of Iraq have spent their credibility

I would say that this holds true not only for their credibility with regard to making a case for war but also with regard to their credibility in terms of being able to successfully plan and fight a war should it become necessary.

As for the merits of military action against Iran, I am solidly unconvinced that the potential benefits come anywhere close to outweighing the risks. And I would remind anyone who advocates military action that you go to war with the administration you have, not the administration you wish you had. And this administration has demonstrated a unique ability to FUBAR everything it touches.

This is why the "Iran is x years away from having the bomb" calculation is particularly relevant in this case. Assuming x > 2.7, and further assuming that a scenario where military action against Iran is genuinely necessary (a big assumption,) the wisest course of action would be to delay military action on our part until 2009, when we would have a more competent administration in place.

It's the uselessness of all traditional checks that has us flummoxed. The fact that they're totally discredited, which would have stopped previous administrations, doesn't faze them. Neither does low support. They have the power, they'll use it. Congress is all that could stop them, and fear for reelection is all that would move Congress out of its paralysis.

MAE, I am mostly unable to get Blogger comments to work lately, so I hijack this space to tell you that this is pwesome.

As to substance:

Fractious ethno-religious groups making formation of a post-invasion government difficult? I don't think so; at least not as much so as in Iraq.

Meh, sounds like this means everyone will be trying to kill us. Not that I think the mullahs are popular but I think we would be pretty unpopular ourselves after an invasion. Especially because the current crew hasn't shown itself too talented at keeping the streets free of sewage or anything like that -- what MAE says about planning and fighting a war goes triple about planning an occupation.

Wow. I tried to read Matt's link from the Internet cafe in China where I'm writing this, and Blogspot sites really are blocked in this country.

Thanks, Matt. Glad you liked it.

Hope you're enjoying China, GB. At the very least, you get amusing travel stories to tell later from the place.

Ahhhh, squat toilets. Quite a contrast from Japan. I had a small side gig teaching English to Chinese employees at the Shangahi branch of a Japanese company, and the Japanese-style toilets there were the highlight of my week, once I figured out what all the buttons and gizmos did. I also always felt a strange sense of pride (and relief) whenever I was in a bathroom and the fixtures were made by American Standard.

I was in China for about five and a half years and enjoyed it (mostly) immensely, but I also thought it was a pretty lousy place in which to be a tourist, especially if on a guided tour.

And I find it so amusing now when people get China and Japan mixed up. It's like mistaking Greece for Sweden or something.

Actually, Japan has squat toilets, too. Depending on where you are relieving yourself, you may be confronted by anything from a humble porcelain hole in the ground, all the way up to the high-tech Toiletron 3000, which has little robot arms that come out and wipe for you. Well, almost.

I think it obnoxious that Belle doesn't own up to the fact that the USA's Skull & Bones gang CREATED Saddam Hussein's power, trained and armed his troops, gave or sold him WMD precursors... all to be able to go after him under false pretense (USA-created Kuwaiti border dispute) under Daddy Bush 41 and again under Do-Wrong Dubya Bush 43. the same cats created the problem as now currently are "solving" it, ironically intractably I might add.

The fact that Saddam Hussein's evil was almost entirely funded by the USA is something I would like to see all the pro-war troggos admit.

Any who cannot is a rank liar.

Um, l.v., where did you get the idea that Belle doesn't own up to the fact that Hussein was armed by the U.S.?

And I don't know if you mean to come across as The Most Self-Righteous Person On The Planet, but you do, at least in that comment. Belle was wrong, and her open admission of this has been gracious, honest, and in good faith. Your response is not, however good it may make you feel.