July 17, 2005

The Fifth Estate's Agenda: No, We Don't Know There's A War On


LAST MONTH Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit was taken to task for a time because of his standard catch-phrase, "Don't you know there's a war on?" To his critics it would seem as if this question, from sheer repetition, was a weak reed to use in criticizing others. In a way it is, but what is more interesting is the obvious answer to that question.

That answer , to judge by the rolling defeatism of the last week or so, is "No, most Americans evidently do not know that there's a war on." At least in the sense that the war that's on affects their daily life. As the steady drip of drivel continues unabated from the left, and as no real sacrifice shows up in the lives of vast numbers of Americans, it can clearly be seen that, in fact, there really is no war on at all in the sense that most would understand it.

That does not mean that the First Terrorist War does not rage on in Iraq, in Saudi Arabia, in the Philippines, in Europe, in Iran, and in dozens of other spots around the globe where the enemies of America work to undermine and destroy the only power that has a candle's chance in Hell of sustaining and forwarding freedom in this century. What is does mean is that, as time goes by and the drip of deaths continue distantly in Iraq, many Americans wonder more and more, 'Hey, what's in this for me?'

One could say, "Well, you and your children and your children's children get to live and continue to live in freedom," but a fish never notices the water until its pond goes dry, does it? Absent a clear and present danger and a daily call for sacrifice, it is little wonder that in the lives of most Americans, there isn't a war on. Because there really isn't.

Ask yourself what your day in this war consists of. Unless you are in the military, it consists really of very little other than the unremitting bad news about the war. You
work, you shop, you watch TV, you putter about your house, you get and you spend, and, if you have the money, there is nothing on God's green earth that is denied you. Your sacrifice for this war amounts to, to date, absolutely nothing.

Your feelings about this war , unless you are very alert, are in the main manipulated and determined by the tacit collusion of several generations of ex-Vietnam/Watergate media professionals and their professional children and grandchildren. These people, now institutionalized, form what is for all intents and purposes both a Fifth Column and, more importantly, a Fifth Estate -- an unelected and self-appointed shadow government that was not envisioned by the Founding Fathers, and hence is not provided for in their system of checks and balances.

This Fifth Estate's habit of mind, coupled with an absence of either duty or honor in its thin traditions, has so long afflicted them that there is, literally, nothing else they can do except shape their narrative of events to parallel a long dead and highly irrelevant historical scenario. They cannot report or discuss this war outside of the strait-jacket of Vietnam because it is, quite literally, the only thing they know how to do. They have never been given an education in either their "Journalism" schools or on the job that allows them to think or report anything that does not echo their shallow catechism.

Those that know of other narratives are seldom, if ever, admitted to the mainstream media coven except as tokens. And then, you can be sure, they are only tolerated and shunned. Over the decades since Vietnam, our media has evolved into a self-sustaining series of institutions that literally cannot see anything other than their internal elite reality. This would be benign if they did not also have the power to inflict it on others. The destruction of this power is the real pivot on which the political fights of the next decade will turn.

Unless we run out of time in which to entertain this cute little internal cultural and political squabble. Unless, of course, many of us wake up one morning to find that there is, after all, a real war on -- one that can reach out and kill us at will.

In this manner, it is both tragic and yet hopeful, that our current war, in order to be really on, waits upon another September 11. For, it is clear now as it has been for sometime, that nothing absent another significant attack on the homeland will wake us from our media induced stupor. A war that takes place half a world away and requires no sacrifices at all from the majority of our citizens is, frankly, no war at all. It is only another in a long series of hamstrung and losing police actions. As it stands, it seems that all we are doing in this "war" is creating more Koreas.

That no further attacks have occured upon American soil since 9/11 is, I am sure, seen by many in the current administration as a sterling accomplishment; something on which they can stand pat. And, taken by itself, it is that. But if it is coupled with a series of lackluster policies and a hampering of our military's will to fight, then it is only something that obscures the real build-up and the real ability of our enemy to kill us. At the same time, it allows the forces in this country who would weaken it to expand their collusion with our enemy. In this, the administration flirts with abject failure. And because this is so, the administration begins to give off the whiff of defeat even as its victories in Iraq mount.

The Republican administration of George W. Bush was given, along with many other things, a mandate to pursue this war last November. It has, along with many other things, failed to do so with any real alacrity or force since the invasion of Iraq. Instead, it has wallowed in the current policies and plans of "bringing Democracy." The successes in this regard have blinded it to the greater responsibilities it holds, not to the Middle East or the Muslims of the world, but first and foremost to our military and our citizenry and to this country.

As in so many other things, the Bush administration has shown itself to be unable to wield real power, to act rather than react. It may be that decades in the wilderness have left the Republicans without the real moral fiber and deep determination to finally use electoral power to effect real change. It may be that internal advisors counsel softer words and a smaller stick. Or it may well be that, canny as always to the mood of the public, the administration too is waiting for our enemy to make the one serious mistake it can still make -- an attack on the homeland.

If it is the latter reason, that would be as craven a motive as one can imagine, but not, knowing the internal souls of politicians, a motive that cannot be imagined.

So, in the final analysis, what will it take for America to wake up and to stay awake, and to finally and at last, "know there is a war on?"

Quite obviously and without a doubt, it will take thousands of dead American civilians: men, women and this time our children too. They will die here on our soil because we did not have the will, the policies, and the guts to pursue this war as a war, using all the terrible power that we command. The dead will be your family and your friends and your neighbors. They will be the cost of the current administration's vapid policies coupled with the unremitting agenda of the Fifth Estate.

That is precisely what it will take. Not one body more. Not one body less. And although our enemy will be at fault, we will have nobody but our own weak and fat souls to blame. After all, we won't be able to say we didn't see it coming this time.

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):

Posted by Vanderleun at July 17, 2005 11:36 AM | TrackBack
Save to del.icio.us


"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper N.B.: Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately. Comments that exceed the obscenity or stupidity limits will be either edited or expunged.


Posted by: Barbara in CT at June 17, 2005 12:21 PM

I would only suggest a modified title:

No, We Don't Know

Posted by: siunevada at June 17, 2005 12:36 PM

Good idea. Done.

Posted by: Gerard Van Der Leun at June 17, 2005 1:01 PM

You nailed this one, Gerard.

Posted by: Xixi at June 17, 2005 1:04 PM

When the second strike takes place, I wonder we will admit that is what it is? Every time something happens the authorities hasten to tell us it’s not Islamic, whether they know anything yet or not.

Part of being treated like children involves being judged as unable to handle the truth.

Posted by: anonymous coward at June 17, 2005 2:34 PM

A very insightful very chilling and above all, accurate post.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at June 17, 2005 4:26 PM

Mr. Van der Luen -

I posted a comment on Roger's blog along the same lines.

We are being failed by several different groups or factions, and the failures range from outright bad faith (our fifth estate and their Left dinosaurs) to lack of will, as in this administration.

We are allowing initiative to slip to the enemy. They are SAFE in countries like Syria, Iran, and Saudi; to a lesser extent in places like Egypt and Pakistan or the Philippines.

Hell, they are SAFE in towns like Dearborn, Berkely, and sadly even large slices of NYC and LA.

I don't want my family to be the next 9/11. Fuck that. I don't want ANY family to be the next 9/11.

Your contention that Manhattanites would call for summary execution of terrorists on street corners is apt. Extend that sentiment to the rage of a nation that finds itself surrounded by dead neighbors and that KNOWS that its government, media, and intelligentsia allowed it to happen. Again.


The Pustule party would have a lot more to worry about than travel records or waiting for the FBI to call about fundraising contacts with foreign powers. And the RIGHT side of the aisle, after having pissed away years of executive dominance and solid majorities in both houses of Congress wouldn't have a leg to stand on either.

I used to admire Bush based on his indifference to polling. His inability to lead the sops who have floated to the top in the legislature crony class of what is laughingly called 'leadership' roles in the Republican majority is, in my opinion, the worst failure of his presidency.

Correction - second worst. Signing CFR was dereliction of duty of the worst kind. Especially for an executive who was supposed to "restore honor".

Great post, sir.

Posted by: TmjUtah at June 17, 2005 6:18 PM

"In this manner, it is both tragic and yet hopeful,
that our current war, in order to be really on,
waits upon another September 11.
For, it is clear now as it has been for sometime,
that nothing absent another significant attack on the homeland will wake us
from our media induced stupor."

no offense to Gerard,
but Daniel Pipes was speaking about
the apparent need for "education by murder"
well over a year ago,with regard to our (the US')broader cultural response to terrorism...
and waning public interest regarding 9/11.


"Education by murder:
Daniel Pipes on the slow American awakening"
by Daniel Mandel
The Review (Melboune)
September 2002


this is also captured in the
metaphor of "the frog in the boiling water"...

there have also been previous discussions
on how sucessfully thwarting attacks on US soil
creates a broader public atmosphere
that can (perversely)support ideologues who claim "there is no terrorist threat".

the one-worlders and post-nationalists
seem,for my money,not to get that
tearing down something(nationalism)
does not insure the ability to replace it with a working alternative(utopian internationalism)
in anything like a blink-of-an-eye...

or that,by weakening exisitng nation-states,
they can miraculously prevent other,
non-utopian opertators from jumping into the power vacuum.


PS - certainly this article from NRO will be unwelcome amongst the Fifth Estate and the recent cries of "McCarthyism",
but NRO writer Ion Mihai Pacepa shares his inside views of how
20thC Communisms' global ambitions and legacy live on in other(?) forms.

Pacepa's insider's view of the USSR's attempt to manipulate
the UN and the West's intellectuals and universities,
give the lie to what many continue to seek to deny.

"Bolton’s Bravery:
The president’s choice
is exactly what the U.N. needs."


Posted by: gumshoe at June 17, 2005 6:36 PM

this is Pipes' actual article
(link above was a 3rd party
commentary/review of the article)

Re: "Education by Murder"....


Education by Murder
By Daniel Pipes
FrontPageMagazine.com | November 16, 2004


Posted by: gumshoe at June 17, 2005 6:43 PM

So, when do we start doing major sorties into Syria?

Seriously, I've been wanting to see that for months now. So have many Iraqi officials. There was an item a while back about how the Iraqis wanted to send assassination squads into Syria to take out Iraqi Ba'athist bigwigs. I'm all for it.

Posted by: Roderick Reilly at June 17, 2005 8:29 PM

Belmont Club put up a post today that ended with this observation, "The enemy has learned to refrain from awakening the US giant, the better to defeat him in his sleep." As I wrote in a comment there, on 9/11 the jihadis prodded the giant with a big stick and the giant woke up for a moment and swatted them back, hard. Now they are treading more softly, hoping the giant will go back his slumber. In this endeavor, the press has a major role to play.

Much of the MSM has indeed become, to all intents and purposes, a Fifth Column. I probably shouldn't use the phrase "has become," because, as you point out, it already had become that during the Vietnam conflict (I've traced the process by which that happened in this post, in case anyone's interested).

But I like to think that, although the press as Fifth Column was virtually unchecked during Vietnam, there are a few checks and balances in place now. Perhaps too few to matter; time will tell about that. But the blogosphere, some talk shows, Fox TV, and a few journals and newspapers have a least made a start towards breaking the stranglehold the MSM previously had on the information filtering down to the American public, and the skepticism of many people towards the MSM has risen in recent years. The blogosphere can at least take a tiny bit of credit for that.

Posted by: neo-neocon at June 18, 2005 1:29 PM

In my opinion as a blog reader (and a blogger wanna be), the blogosphere can take a lot of credit. Thank you.

Posted by: Barbara Spalding at June 18, 2005 1:42 PM

i came across this quote earlier today:

"Veni, Vidi, Dormivi"
(I came, I saw, I slept)

some bloggers comments on sleeping giants, over at belmont on this thread:
"By Other Means 3"

jakita said...

Your last sentence is chilling. If I were America's enemy, I would keep the giant asleep while I infiltrated its comfy home.

Too many Americans have forgotten 9-11. Meanwhile, they've learned little about the implacable nature of Islam.
This is why I've been so pissed at the nonsensical writing in the MSM,
not to mention fools like Sen. Durbin who've done their part to put the giant to sleep.
8:10 AM

NahnCee said...
Even a sleeping giant can inflict enormous damage as it tosses fitfully, if you give it something to have nightmares about.

Forklift said...
I wish the sleeping giant could feign sleep while being as watchful as only he can be;
the war could be shortened.
Come a little closer.
3:00 PM

Posted by: gumshoe at June 18, 2005 9:58 PM

Written on my site, February 21, 2005:

Fourth estate: n., Journalists considered as a group; the public press.

Fifth column: n., A clandestine subversive organization working within a country to further an invading enemy's military and political aims.

[First applied in 1936 to rebel sympathizers inside Madrid when four columns of rebel troops were attacking that city.]

Courtesy of the G man, the Guru.

Flirtation with a giddy power that can bring down the powerful is dangerous. And habit-forming. And not lasting. What goes around comes around. And will again.

Posted by: Everyman at June 19, 2005 1:07 AM

"it is both tragic and yet hopeful, that our current war, in order to be really on, waits upon another September 11"

You are a sick, sick person. You sound as though you _want_ more dead countrymen.

To paraphrase Pogo, we have met the enemy and you is it. Sick, sad and redolent of "Mein Kampf."

Posted by: A N Other at June 19, 2005 5:25 PM

Sigh. And to think you almost got to fifty words without a Hitler reference. You'll just have to try harder to achieve originality in the future.

Posted by: Gerard Van Der Leun at June 19, 2005 5:34 PM

Hey Gerard, if it walks like a jack boot, and quacks like a jack boot.....besides, your nietzschian tantrum ain't what I would call original.

Posted by: Brian in Oakland at June 19, 2005 6:09 PM

clearly for A N Other, and Brian in Oakland,
3000 of us wasn't quite enough.

terrorism *is* education by murder.

and i ain't buyin'.

Posted by: gumshoe at June 19, 2005 6:41 PM

i ain't buyin'....and i'm sure it's all
because of my "false consiousness".

Rally in NYC on Monday, 20June05
at WTC site:


for those who haven't read the
Opinion Jornal.com (WSJ) piece by
Debra Burlingame,please do...


The Great Ground Zero Heist
Will the 9/11 "memorial" have more about Abu Ghraib than New York's heroic firemen?

Wednesday, June 8, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT



Posted by: gumshoe at June 19, 2005 6:48 PM

Long on paranoia. Short on facts. See www.jameswolcott.com

nuf sed.

Posted by: Joe Blow at June 19, 2005 7:09 PM

Lighten up, Clyde. Fix up a Johnny Walker Red on the rocks, smoke a Kool, and relax. Maybe even get yourself a broad, if you know how to.

- Frank Sinatra

Posted by: Frank Sinatra at June 19, 2005 7:41 PM

"All who don't agree with me, want thousands, millions, trillions more American dead!"-gumshoe. Stop Thought at it's finnest. "Brain's, i ain't buyin'"

Posted by: Brian in Oakland at June 19, 2005 7:59 PM

I wonder why all the people who are so gung ho for perpetual war do not enlist? If it is such a great cause and our country's future depends on it, why write about it from the comfortable environs of Laguna Beach?

Posted by: kirby at June 19, 2005 8:46 PM

Ah yes, the tried and tired idea that those who support the war against terror must be, somehow, members of the military in order to support the military.

Do you take the least jot of time to think that sort of thing through or does it just kind of stick to your shoe?

Posted by: Gerard Van Der Leun at June 19, 2005 8:59 PM

WHY DO YOU HATE OUR TROOPS AND PRESIDENT SO MUCH MR VAN DER LOINS? When he flew that plane on the carrier deck it said "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED," which means THE WAR IS OVER. Are you calling Mr. Bush a liar, Mr. Van Der Loins? Are you calling Condolesba Rice a liar? THE WAR IS OVER thanks to our glorious leader in his George Washington-like glory. We should start painting his image on the sides of buildings with slogans, and write great songs about how smart and powerful he is. We can all sing them as we sit around fires burning Dixie Chicks music and corrupt weak books, magazines, and newspapers. You are just corrupted by your left wing media buddies AND ONLY PRETENDING TO BE A GOOD CONSERVATIVE. Once the American Militias are in charge, they will find a place for people with funny French names like Van Der Loins, pal.
Flag high, ranks closed,
The GOP marches with silent solid steps.
Comrades shot by the red front and reaction
march in spirit with us in our ranks.

The street free for the Bush battalions,
The street free for the Storm Troopers.
Millions, full of hope, look up at the elephant;
The day breaks for freedom and for bread.

For the last time the call will now be blown;
For the struggle now we all stand ready.
Soon will fly Bush-flags over every street;
Slavery will last only a short time longer.

Flag high, ranks closed,
The GOP marches with silent solid steps.
Comrades shot by the red front and reaction
march in spirit with us in our ranks.

Posted by: bigfoot at June 19, 2005 9:09 PM

Put that zeal to good use.


Posted by: Rees Jones-Jones at June 19, 2005 9:09 PM

It might be better for us all if this Empire falls with a whimper, rather than a bang.

To the poster above who thinks you can invade Syria - get real!

You're billions of dollars in hock to the Chinese, the Japanese, the Koreans and the Europeans (but mostly the Chinese).

And your 'mighty' military is bogged down in the sands against 20,000 motivated insurgents armed with light arms.

In my country, Australia, the US recently came FOURTH LAST in a nationwide poll of our attitudes towards other countries. The only countries less popular amongst Australians than the US are Indonesia, Iran and Iraq. A majority of Australians find the USA a bigger threat to the world than Islamic terrorism.

This is Australia were talking about here, people. You know, us cute Aussies that go surfing and whatever. Shrimps on the barbie, etc.

Australians, as a nation, like China more than we like you guys.

You've already lost the image of 'Leader of the Free World' and you don't even realise it yet.


Posted by: floopmeister at June 19, 2005 9:10 PM

Mr van der Leun says it will take thousands of deaths. Precisely. Not one body less or more. Anyone else see what's wrong with that.

It's not a big error, but it does give a indication of the quite remarkable level of stupidity of the author and his regular readers.

Posted by: AG at June 19, 2005 9:51 PM

No, Geri. Kirby means that if YOU want to WIN that bad, why don't you get your scared self off the comfy Left Coast and join our soldiers at the front(?). Well...???

Posted by: Frightened guys? at June 19, 2005 9:59 PM

floop ya flopped. "...USA a bigger threat to the world than Islamic terrorism"? And then you name three Islamic countries above the USA! Didn't a few of you blokes get blown up somewhere in Indonesia? Must have swung a few votes, no? Well, maybe you don't care for the female sideburns and moustaches. But "cute" Aussies? I've never seen so many big, rugged, masculine women in my life.

Posted by: Frightened guys? at June 19, 2005 10:23 PM

Frightened guy: you seem to be missing the point.

This is a nationwide poll, mate, not some show of hands in a liberal uni common room. Left, right, liberal, conservative - it doesn't matter what the politics are - the USA is one of the most unpopular countries as far as Australians are concerned.

I didn't name 'three Islamic countries' - the Australian people did. You are mistaking 'Dislike of Islam and Islamic countries' with 'Fear of Islamic terrorism'.

Australians obviously don't like Iran and Iraq - they simply don't buy the hype about a worldwide 'terror threat'. The bumbling and arrogant reaction of the US is what most Australians are more worried about; not some great mysterious Islamic plot to destroy the world.

With regard to Indonesia - the bombing happened on Bali, remember? HINDU Bali? There was a massive outpouring of support for the Balinese - the attitude towards Indonesia has more to do with the Corby drug smuggling case (Google it if you're interested).

I've never seen so many big, rugged, masculine women in my life

Well, don't worry - they'll be leaving you alone, Cupcake. Elle McPherson, Nicole Kidman and Naomi Watts are obviously too much for you to handle, hey?

Posted by: floopmeister at June 19, 2005 11:39 PM

Another pile of Neocon twaddle. The Neocons have failed, and don't even know it.

Posted by: AltF4 at June 20, 2005 6:09 AM

Mr. V.d.L:

We seem to agree on one thing: the Prez. could have handled our response to 9/11 quite differently and we wouldn't be in our current mess. You apparently would like to have seen the U.S. declare war on all Islamic countries and had them nuked out of existence (I assume that's what you mean about "using all the terrible power that we command.")

Another way it could have been done is the Prez. could have taken advantage of worldwide sympathy and support to quietly and effectively go after Islamic extremism where it exists using a combination of law enforcement, intelligence and military Special Forces. In addition, we could have used every means at our disposal to make the homeland more secure.

Instead we got the Axis of Evil speech, the counter-productive war in Iraq, the Kafka-esque GITMO, and global hatred toward our cause. Nice job Mr. Bush!

So now you're blaming the people who don't support Bush's misguided policies.

A few months ago I got an email from an American friend working at the U.S. Embassy in Kenya. She said "I don't recognize America any more. It's turned into the Stepford Wives meets Jerry Falwell meets Joe McCarthy." After reading your essay and the comments of your supporters, I have a better understanding of the Joe McCarthy faction she was talking about.

Posted by: kirby at June 20, 2005 6:30 AM

The thinking in this post is similar to the German Military between the Wars. If only we do the same thing better we will win and anyone who disagrees with us must be eliminated for the security of the Nation.

Well Bollocks. And we all know where Germany's strategic thinking ended.

Why are we in Iraq? Does being in Iraq serve the national interest? These are the questions a Republic is allowed to ask daily, monthly, yearly. And anyone who doesn't believe that has a weak faith in America as a Democracy.

Posted by: Northen Observer at June 20, 2005 7:16 AM

Hmmmm. Aside from the "5th Estate" twaddle, an interesting read, though I find it interesting that Mr. Van der Loon calls for sacrifice but doesn't give an example of a way to make said sacrifice and rejects one that would seem appropriate for a supporter of the Iraq debacle, enlisting in the military.

Posted by: gus at June 20, 2005 9:28 AM

I didn't pick up on your mixing "unpopular" with "threat". Maybe you could correct it.
Perhaps you and I are on the same page regarding the difference in dislike and fear. I'd suggest you not speak so confidently for others. I know I wouldn't.
Now see, you've listed a litany of blondes. I grew up within that culture and strongly desire the brunettes. In all honesty, Elle had her day. The other two I leave for you. Enjoy.

Posted by: Frightened guys? at June 20, 2005 9:36 AM

I find it instructive that all those for whom "enlistment" would seem to be the sole measure of sincerity do not seem to be aware of the actual current requirements for enlistment.

Then again they may be but, since it does not suit their position, they seem all to ready to forget them. I'd call that intellectual dishonesty, but they'd probably not remember what that was either.

Posted by: Gerard Van Der Leun at June 20, 2005 9:55 AM

This Van Der Leun loon hasn't anything original or insightful to say. "We're losing the war because of the media and those traitorous liberals, blah blah blah." Standard warblogger cant, posted 1000 times in slightly varied forms on 1000 blogs. Van Der Leun presents no new evidence, no novel argument, simply a series of wild assertions to be accepted at face value by the trivial and ignorant. Most damningly, he lacks the courage to make his proposals as to how the war should be fought plain and obvious, preferring to cloak whatever ideas he may have in vague blandishments about "the power we command." All sound and fury....

Posted by: Big Worm at June 20, 2005 10:03 AM

Well, history will vindicate one or the other, won't it?

As for "how this war should be fought" I refer you to dozens of other essays to be found in the archives.

As for the war being lost, that's not going to happen. The only question will be the ultimate cost in money and lives on all sides.

Posted by: Gerard Van Der Leun at June 20, 2005 10:09 AM

Ah yes, the tried and tired idea that those who support the war against terror must be, somehow, members of the military in order to support the military.

Makes a lot more sense than the tried and tired idea that those who don't support the disaster that is our occupation of Iraq must somehow be traitors.

Posted by: Green Akerz at June 20, 2005 10:23 AM

I have a couple of questions for those who think anyone who supports the war should enlist before they can talk about the conduct and course of the war:

1. Does that also apply to those who oppose the war?
2. Are you aware of the physical, age and other requirements for enlistment? Do you feel these should be waived, and if so, for everyone or only for war supporters?
3. Are you really willing to leave something as important as war in the hands of the military alone? If so, do you realize that more free nations have been taken over by their own militaries than by any other force? Are you willing to risk that?
4. Given the large number of people who are called "chickenhawks" who have served or are serving in the military, how does one overcome the slur? If there is no way to overcome the slur except by converting to an anti-war position, does that mean that anyone who is not anti-war is a "chickenhawk", even if they are on the sharp end?
5. Is it necessary to be a doctor or nurse to comment on health care issues? What if you think that the problem with our medical system in the US is too much insurance and too much government funding?
6. Is it necessary to be a teacher to comment on government schools? What if you are against them?
7. Is it necessary to be old to comment on Social Security? What if you are against it?
8. How does having a pro-war opinion, while not being able to serve, make one a "coward", while having an anti-war position and being unwilling to serve presumably does not?

Just, you know, asking.

Posted by: Jeff Medcalf at June 20, 2005 10:56 AM

And difficult to answer. But you should know that you cast your pearls here before swine... of the sort that simply log in from different addresses in order to somehow give themselves the impression that there's lots of dissent on this issue in this thread.

You know, the small and stunted people we call trolls. Except in this case they are not quite multiple.

Posted by: Gerard Van Der Leun at June 20, 2005 11:02 AM

I have a question for all you sabre-rattling hawks.... Where are those from your ranks volunteering to go to Iraq and fight this war of necessity ? Do you all have hemorrhoids (as Rush Limbaugh used to get out of service) or do you have "more important matters to tend to" (as Dick Cheney used) ?
You're all a bunch of hypocrites wrapping yourself in the flag.

Posted by: Swimmr at June 20, 2005 11:27 AM

So what exactly is BUSH doing to make sure we don't have ANOTHER 9/11? Securing the ports, making sure Homeland Security works? Working to create a positive image of the United States in the Middle East by disarming Fundamentalist Islamists of their greatest propaganda tools?

NO - the Iraq War and GITMO will be used to recruit the future perpetrators of the "next 9/11," and AMERICAN blood will be on the hands of Bush and the rest of you who supported him.

Posted by: TRUTHMISSILE at June 20, 2005 11:44 AM

I think Steve G. might have had you and your supporters in mind here:

"You don't need to be a soldier to serve in Iraq. You can work as a contractor, US government official or NGO employee. You don't have to carry a gun. Hell, they even want people to work in the military hospitals if they have the skills. And you will be well compensated. So what exactly is your exscuse for not going to Iraq. 'Other priorities?'"

Posted by: kirby at June 20, 2005 11:54 AM

Jeff and Geri,
In recent history there have been far, far too many Americans asking others to do the fighting for them(Bush II, Cheney, Wolfie and perhaps you two etc... etc...). If you feel that there is something ssssssssssssssoooooooooooo important that it takes KILLING another human being to settle differences then the honest, valiant, noble, and downright proper course of action would be either head to the front lines or follow kirby's suggestions. Personally, I'd be too uncomfortable in my own skin to ask a fellow countryman to die for me. Well, unless I was into exploiting humanity.

Posted by: Frightened guys? at June 20, 2005 12:24 PM

In the eyes of the insane left and the insane left commentators here America inhabits the medieval doctrine of the Prime Mover. Only America possesses agency over its actions. Its movement is ultimately accountable for all other movement going on in the world. So when America takes action to defend itself, and gets hit, America is really to blame for getting hit (since no other agents are responsible for their actions). This is the front and back fig-leaf tease that the left uses to cover its nakedness: America is guilty - whatever it does or doesn't do.

By the way: folks like truthmissle cannot answer when you ask them: "What in the hell do you know about terrorist creation?" "How do you create a terrorist?" Suddenly now they are big experts on terrorist creation? Where was all their expertise before 9/1?

Posted by: Doug at June 20, 2005 12:34 PM


It would not surprise me one bit if the evil, Freedom-Hating Neo-Fascists 'create' another 9-11... Not one bit. George Orwell is sooooo proud of Karl Rove.

The unfortunate truth - America has only ONE enemy: The Republican Party 'Leadership'. An enemy that deserves no compassion whatsoever; only scorn, ridicule and severe punishment. Hopefully, their vain and vicious false gods will come and take them away soon, to leave the rest of us in peace.

Never forget, Osama bin Laden is a card-carrying member of the GOP (and the NRA, as well). I have his pledge cards, membership cards and dues receipts and Freedom Medals (signed by Gee Dumbya himself!) in pdf form if you wish to see them.

-A Real Patriot

Posted by: StupidSexyJesus at June 20, 2005 12:45 PM

"Ah yes, the tried and tired idea that those who support the war against terror must be, somehow, members of the military in order to support the military.

Do you take the least jot of time to think that sort of thing through or does it just kind of stick to your shoe?"

You can "support" the military all you want. Not much risk of dying in that, is there? Not much chance of your children dying if they don't join up, hey?

Back in the old days the one who ordered the charge was expected to lead it. It was called honor. If you want to order others to their death, have the balls to take the same risk yourself. If you're too old or infirm, send your kid.

For all your bravado I bet you don't know anyone in Iraq or anyone with a kid in Iraq. You kidding? Why would anyone from Laguna Beach join up for that? You can just "support" them from home and call anyone who disagrees with you a traitor. It's really much easier and it makes you feel good, too.

Posted by: Pug at June 20, 2005 2:40 PM

Fifth estate. Islmaofacism. Freedom marching. The Next Big Attack Is Coming!! Time to Repent!!!!
You spin all these grand, abstract theories but ignore the simplest possible conclusion: that the person behind the first attack is most likely sitting in Pakistan planning the next one.
Any dark fantasies about that one, sir?

Posted by: Scot at June 20, 2005 3:04 PM

The point is sir that in a Republic the people are permitted to question the War Policy. Unless you are advocating that we no longer live in a Democracy but submit ourselves to the Oligarchs?

No country has ever benifited from a protracted War. Sun Tzu pointed out the obvious over 2500 years ago. You would think that the War Party that let us bleed to death in Vietnam would have learned that lesson. Instead they are once again draining the treasury, and corrupting our Army. Mostly the War Party is crushing America's belief in its own nataural goodness, by engaging in torture that betrays the spirit of our laws and by forcing the Army and our noble servicemen into impossible situations.

Once again I ask these latter day Cleons; why are we still in Iraq?

Posted by: Northern Observer at June 21, 2005 7:31 AM

Dear Mr. Van Der Leun:

I’m suspicious that the war in Iraq may be just a scheme to sell more goods and services to the government, a kind of backdoor communism. The terrorists’ main goal is to have every Middle Eastern country led by an Islamic Fundamentalist. Let’s face it, to Osama things are working out perfectly in Iraq. So, why did we invade Iraq? Maybe it’s because it’s much easier to sell things to the government than to consumers. I’m sure these matters deeply concern you as well. More than a thousand US soldiers dead and two hundred billion dollars later, and we’ve helped our enemy to realize his main goal in Iraq: an Islamic Fundamentalist majority in their government who are allies with Iran. Osama will probably send President Bush an Islamic Christmas card and wish him well; this thought sickens me to the core! The liberal media surely haven’t picked up on this angle.

My solution: A: Immediately void the elections in Iraq! B: Send Paul Bremer back (“Send Bremer Back” sounds like a good rallying cry). C: Put more boots on the ground! D: Widen the war by invading Iran and Syria!

Putting more boots on the ground to be able to widen this war will be difficult in these times because of the influence of the cowardly Left, which unfortunately makes selective service political suicide for the political party in power. How this could be a fact in our great country I’ll never know.

My solution (and I hope you will help me with this endeavor) is to create a volunteer army of like-minded individuals. These are penultimate times. We must help the President and make a sacrifice for our country, our ideology, and our GOD! My vision is the creation of a web site Volunteer dot com, or something of the sort, (I’ll need your help on this) that will post observations and testimonials of patriots of all walks of life that have joined the fight by enlistment. This national movement will have two purposes: (1.) is to give the President confidence and freedom to pursue this historic battle to the ultimate resolution, and (2.) to show those wimpy lefty cowards what this country is all about! I imagine a logo for the site graphically depicting a dozen volunteers clutched in the talons of the great American war eagle.

Regrettably, I’m too old and my eyesight is not up to par for this great sacrifice; I’m going to be relegated to the sidelines. I’m sure judging by your blog that a great American like you have already joined, or are on the verge of making that sacrifice and I applaud you! You could be the first to post your testimonials.

Let me make a detour here. The fact that communist China is financing our debt is very disturbing. Could this financing of our debt be a conspiracy to destroy our great country’s economy? Are we being lead by our desire for easy financial gain down the road to our own destruction? The weak position of being the debtor to a communist country is dangerous because of the insipid and coercive influence that they will have over us. To scuff off this compromised position is the very essence of foolishness. The communist influence will be subtle, maybe only a government insider will know the full extent that we have been led astray, our global strategy thwarted.

Should we really be buying goods manufactured in a communist country? I did a search around my home and you can only imagine how many times I saw a made in

China sticker on the products I had bought. You do a similar search yourselves. I tell you it’s a real eye opener! What are they doing with the money, buying military technology, gaining friends and influence throughout the world, all paid for by the good ole US of A? Have we been duped?

I’ve been a proud member of the John Birch Society, and I have worked for the CIA for thirty two years (now retired) and I’ve never been as alarmed as I am now! I’ve been trying to make fellow conservatives (the true Americans) realize the deep danger our country is in. That endeavor has been difficult and I need help. After reading your web site thoroughly I consider you a great patriotic American and I hope that you will consider seriously the questions I posed and help me spread the word! Your talents would be useful in the war against this communist plot.


Walter Berger III

Posted by: Walter Berger III at June 21, 2005 11:22 AM

You are FANTASTIC! What a post. You can bet you've tugged on the patriotic strings of all these right wing armchair wannabes and the enlistment offices will be packed manana. Truly manana. Geri as soldier. Unf***ing real.

Posted by: Frightened guys? at June 21, 2005 2:37 PM

Some interesting points, which I'm still pondering. One exception: there was no mandate, not for war, not for anything. We are divided. Duh!

Posted by: Tom at June 22, 2005 10:54 AM

We are desperately short of troops to win the war. You criticize those who criticize. Why don't you criticize those who don't enlist?

Posted by: Alan in SF at June 23, 2005 12:56 AM

Note to Gerard: "Trolls" are people who use dishonest arguments or make pointless ad hominem attacks. People with opposing points of view are what used to be called "Democracy."

And are you really contending that we post from different addresses so it looks like there's nine of us instead of six of us? How fiendishly clever of us!

Posted by: Alan in SF at June 23, 2005 1:10 AM
Post a comment:

"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper N.B.: Comments are moderated to combat spam and may not appear immediately. Comments that exceed the obscenity or stupidity limits will be either edited or expunged.

Remember personal info?