licentious radio

Saturday, April 5, 2003
[11:52:55 AM]

Josh Marshall [talkingpointsmemo.com]: "...the particulars of Kerry's remark are almost beside the point. This is no better than cheap bullying practiced by the president's hacks. And, in political life as in personal life, there is only one way to deal with bullies: you must fight back against them with at least the ferocity and intensity that they use against you. They understand nothing else and deserve nothing better. There's no reasoning with them, no apologizing to them, no hashing out the particulars of remarks you've made. Bullying, bluff and aggression have been the signature modus operandi of the president's political operatives in domestic politics for the last two years."

[11:49:50 AM]

The biggest mystery is why the Iraqis fought so ineptly.

Many were obviously very *brave*, charging invulnerable American tanks with their SUVs and machine guns. There were plenty of reports of attacks that slowed up convoys while US troops responded -- typically claiming to kill numerous Iraqis.

The story is Tommy-Boy Franks launched the invasion ahead of schedule in order to rescue the oil fields on the border. That's *billions* of dollars for Bush's cronies that he saved. On the other hand, if the Iraqis were going to torch that oil field, why didn't they torch all the others? More likely, they wanted to torch a few wells to block the view of jet bombers, like burning oil in trenches around Baghdad or Basra.

Why didn't the Iraqis have weapons that would pierce the lightly armored troop transports? Why didn't they have weapons to pierce the tanks? Why didn't they at least *practice* shooting their RPGs, so they could at least hit supply trucks with them?

There's still Baghdad. Did the Republican Guard really wait around for the US air force to destroy it, bomb by bomb, or did they just sneak back to Baghdad to fight on terms that are slightly less hopeless?

Probably the answer is that -- like all fascist regimes -- promotion is based on demonstrations of ideology, not demonstrations of excellence. The smartest Iraqis were laying low, keeping their politics to themselves. Stupid, cruel, arrogant men rose to power through cronyism. (Don't let's mention cronyism around Bush and Cheney!!!)

Another mystery -- why doesn't anyone question the body counts and damage assessments the US hands out? A few tanks drove through Baghdad today, and we claimed we killed 1,000 Iraqis. Am I supposed to think our soldiers stopped to check how many Iraqis were dead, not just wounded?

We *hope*, of course, that Saddam decides to give it up, and the citizens of Baghdad go along. It would be very nice to have this war *over*, and concentrate on feeding people, giving them water, and getting a working, honest police force going again. Maybe pass out some chocolate bars, too.

[11:02:18 AM]
"The battle raged for six hours, ending only when Cobra attack helicopters and Warthogs arrived, blasting Iraqi positions and allowing Marines to back out of the city."

It wasn't in the *plan* that they would need air cover when they reached Nasiriya. A bunch of dead marines were just following the plan.

Thank you, Rummy. Thank you, Myers. Enjoy your retirement.

[10:05:56 AM]
Isn't it freaky, this "where in the world is Saddam Hussein"?

I guess they think it's good propaganda -- keep the Iraqis wondering, maybe. Surely they hope to get poor Saddam to give his position away.

But if Saddam were dead, that would mean this whole war was waged by the government of Iraq, without Saddam as its terrorist master. The "regime change" and "liberate" lines would be completely illegitimate. As is -- so far, so good -- the so-called weapons of mass destruction.

But then, whoever said Bush was concerned about legitimacy.