Comments on: O’Hanlon Defends His Old Friend Petraeus, ‘Convinced’ Pentagon Is Wrong On Iraq Stats http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/ Thu, 26 Nov 2009 01:16:34 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: An Outhouse http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-2/#comment-4104407 An Outhouse Wed, 03 Oct 2007 21:08:22 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4104407 I really love me some Petraeus sausage! -- M. O'Hanlan I really love me some Petraeus sausage!

– M. O’Hanlan

]]> By: Xisithrus http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-2/#comment-4103938 Xisithrus Wed, 03 Oct 2007 18:08:06 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4103938 Comment by Brandon Wolner — October 2, 2007 Check out the campaign promises made by dear leader, and you will see he is doing what he accused others of, using our troops for nation building. Typical of the racist republicans always wanting to hang people. Comment by Brandon Wolner — October 2, 2007

Check out the campaign promises made by dear leader, and you will see he is doing what he accused others of, using our troops for nation building.

Typical of the racist republicans always wanting to hang people.

]]> By: pbg http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-2/#comment-4103341 pbg Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:23:08 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4103341 Rovian Stormtrooper commander: Would Jules Feiffer cartoons be included in this tax? And bongos? And Thelonious Monk LPs? Rovian Stormtrooper commander:
Would Jules Feiffer cartoons be included in this tax? And bongos? And Thelonious Monk LPs?

]]> By: pbg http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-2/#comment-4103288 pbg Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:05:55 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4103288 What happened on 9/11 was what military theorist had been talking about was an asymmetric threat. A big powerful nation was dealt significant damage by a small organization not tied to any state. Lots of people were talking about how to conduct asymmetric warfare. well, rumsfeld and the Bush administration answered that: just ignore the problems and wage war on states. We went into Afghanistan, but not focused on Bin Laden: they fought the war as if the target were the Taliban.The result? We overthrew the Taliban pretty easily, but let what was supposed to be our target, Bin Laden, go free. Instead of pursuing the enemy , the Bush Administration instead goes after another state. They lie about Sadam 's threat level,they tout his Bin Laden connection when we were not actually going after Bin Laden himself or going after states that had far better connectiobs to Bin Laden, like Pakistan, where he is, or Saudi Arabia, where his money comes from. and Iraq becomes a disaster, and why? Because after the military objectives, bogus as they were, were easily achieved (neutralization of the nonexistent WMD threat, deposition of Saddam), the Bush Administration went for a political objective that was both morally wrong and impossible to achieve: occupying the country. This objective, which not only has nothing to do with asymmetric warfare but nothing to do with state-to-state warfare, has torn the military apart, depleted our coffers, and made us a laughingstock. And the hundreds of globally broadcast voices calling for the destruction of all Islam and a War of Civilizations has made us look like crazy brutes. The asymmetric threat is still out there, and what are we doing about it? OBL is sitting in Pakistan laughing at us, and his network is more powerful than ever. We have not even taken the first step, which is taking him out. Nor are we rooting out Al Qaeda's network globally. Nor have we hardened our national defenses against terrorist attack, neither by guarding our ports, our chemical plants, our trains carrying lethal chemicals, or our nuclear power plants--nor by welding ourfirst responders into a lightning national rescue team. As Katrina showed, theBush Administration has done quite the opposite. Asymmetric warfare is a terrible threat, the moreso as technology increases. Even if Al-Qaeda is erased, even if 'Islamofascism' is neutralized, the threat is such that it will happen again. We desperately need to learn how to fight an asymmetric war. But the Bush Administration has ignored it completely. It abandoned (or never even took up) the challenge of asymmetric war in favor of two old-fashioned state-to-state wars, and their plans seem only to consist of conducting yet a third. the fact that they bungled both is only an additional disaster. The Bush party seems only interested in Al Qaeda as a justification for their irrelevant and unproductive state-to-state wars. Not only have we squandered our fortune, our good name, and the lives of our best in these disastrous military adventures, but we are no closer to learning how to deal with an asymmetric threat. What happened on 9/11 was what military theorist had been talking about was an asymmetric threat. A big powerful nation was dealt significant damage by a small organization not tied to any state. Lots of people were talking about how to conduct asymmetric warfare.
well, rumsfeld and the Bush administration answered that: just ignore the problems and wage war on states.
We went into Afghanistan, but not focused on Bin Laden: they fought the war as if the target were the Taliban.The result? We overthrew the Taliban pretty easily, but let what was supposed to be our target, Bin Laden, go free.
Instead of pursuing the enemy , the Bush Administration instead goes after another state. They lie about Sadam ’s threat level,they tout his Bin Laden connection when we were not actually going after Bin Laden himself or going after states that had far better connectiobs to Bin Laden, like Pakistan, where he is, or Saudi Arabia, where his money comes from.
and Iraq becomes a disaster, and why? Because after the military objectives, bogus as they were, were easily achieved (neutralization of the nonexistent WMD threat, deposition of Saddam), the Bush Administration went for a political objective that was both morally wrong and impossible to achieve: occupying the country.
This objective, which not only has nothing to do with asymmetric warfare but nothing to do with state-to-state warfare, has torn the military apart, depleted our coffers, and made us a laughingstock. And the hundreds of globally broadcast voices calling for the destruction of all Islam and a War of Civilizations has made us look like crazy brutes.
The asymmetric threat is still out there, and what are we doing about it? OBL is sitting in Pakistan laughing at us, and his network is more powerful than ever. We have not even taken the first step, which is taking him out. Nor are we rooting out Al Qaeda’s network globally. Nor have we hardened our national defenses against terrorist attack, neither by guarding our ports, our chemical plants, our trains carrying lethal chemicals, or our nuclear power plants–nor by welding ourfirst responders into a lightning national rescue team. As Katrina showed, theBush Administration has done quite the opposite.
Asymmetric warfare is a terrible threat, the moreso as technology increases. Even if Al-Qaeda is erased, even if ‘Islamofascism’ is neutralized, the threat is such that it will happen again. We desperately need to learn how to fight an asymmetric war.
But the Bush Administration has ignored it completely. It abandoned (or never even took up) the challenge of asymmetric war in favor of two old-fashioned state-to-state wars, and their plans seem only to consist of conducting yet a third.
the fact that they bungled both is only an additional disaster.
The Bush party seems only interested in Al Qaeda as a justification for their irrelevant and unproductive state-to-state wars. Not only have we squandered our fortune, our good name, and the lives of our best in these disastrous military adventures, but we are no closer to learning how to deal with an asymmetric threat.

]]> By: cowalker http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-2/#comment-4103210 cowalker Wed, 03 Oct 2007 14:46:32 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4103210 "My idea to pay for the war: a $.01 tax on finger sandwiches, interpretive dances, sit-ins, Che shirts, communist pamphlets and fainting spells after uttering the words 'President Bush'. "Shoot, the influx of cash from Seattle alone would erase the deficit by next week and pay off the future war against Iran by the end of the month." Comment by Rovian Stormtrooper Commander — October 2, 2007 @ 6:09 pm I didn't know this site could receive messages from the past, a la the 2000 movie "Frequency." Sheesh, people have been using finger sandwiches, interpretative dancing and fainting spells as lame examples of effeteness since Oscar Wilde carried out the publicity stunt of walking through London in a velvet suit carrying a flower that symbolized his sensitivity. It's very, very, very old and pointless. There have been a few sit-ins carried out by veterans protesting the Iraq war, but not many. It's hilarious when right-wingers stuck in the sixties call those protesting the war in Iraq "communists." They might as well call them "suffragettes" or "Know-nothings" or "abolitionists." Those issues have as much to do with the Iraq war as communism. Che was a good-looking revolutionary who died young. Those who wear the shirts are saying they're politically tone-deaf but want to be chic. They're not communists. “My idea to pay for the war: a $.01 tax on finger sandwiches, interpretive dances, sit-ins, Che shirts, communist pamphlets and fainting spells after uttering the words ‘President Bush’.

“Shoot, the influx of cash from Seattle alone would erase the deficit by next week and pay off the future war against Iran by the end of the month.”

Comment by Rovian Stormtrooper Commander — October 2, 2007 @ 6:09 pm

I didn’t know this site could receive messages from the past, a la the 2000 movie “Frequency.” Sheesh, people have been using finger sandwiches, interpretative dancing and fainting spells as lame examples of effeteness since Oscar Wilde carried out the publicity stunt of walking through London in a velvet suit carrying a flower that symbolized his sensitivity. It’s very, very, very old and pointless. There have been a few sit-ins carried out by veterans protesting the Iraq war, but not many. It’s hilarious when right-wingers stuck in the sixties call those protesting the war in Iraq “communists.” They might as well call them “suffragettes” or “Know-nothings” or “abolitionists.” Those issues have as much to do with the Iraq war as communism. Che was a good-looking revolutionary who died young. Those who wear the shirts are saying they’re politically tone-deaf but want to be chic. They’re not communists.

]]> By: Jay Randal http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-2/#comment-4102944 Jay Randal Wed, 03 Oct 2007 07:02:52 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4102944 O'Hanlon and Petraeus have had a close personal relationship for over 20 years? Look at the pic everyone > they are "Brokeback Mountain" lovers. O’Hanlon and Petraeus have had a close personal relationship for over 20 years? Look at the pic everyone > they are “Brokeback Mountain” lovers.

]]> By: spaceman56 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-2/#comment-4102578 spaceman56 Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:51:08 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4102578 And it's not General Betrayus - It's General Betray the troops! And it’s not General Betrayus – It’s General Betray the troops!

]]> By: spaceman56 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-2/#comment-4102536 spaceman56 Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:32:12 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4102536 Nothing like a chickenhawk troll fest! what a bunch of mouth breathing maroons! Petraus lies and more death. must make you proud! Every vet that comes home legless armless or insane - they are on your chickenhawk heads but trolls are sociopaths like their leaders - so that's probably not a bifg concern. Neither are treason looting the treasury - torture or the US constitution. Real patriots. Party before country or ideals! Nothing like a chickenhawk troll fest! what a bunch of mouth breathing maroons!
Petraus lies and more death. must make you proud! Every vet that comes home legless armless or insane – they are on your chickenhawk heads but trolls are sociopaths like their leaders – so that’s probably not a bifg concern.
Neither are treason looting the treasury – torture or the US constitution. Real patriots. Party before country or ideals!

]]> By: Mickey http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4102168 Mickey Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:44:33 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4102168 The problem is that Petraeus' numbers are "impossible" as <strong><a href="http://www.democracyarsenal.org/2007/09/fuzzy-numbers-a.html" rel="nofollow">DemocracyArsenal</a></strong> and my blog [<strong><a href="http://1boringoldman.com/index.php/2007/09/18/graphs-and-graphics-the-petraeus-story/" rel="nofollow">1boringoldman</a></strong>] both reported as soon as the <strong>Pentagon Report </strong>came out. Comparing their data shows that Petraeus has several months with <em>negative</em> numbers for casualties - obviously impossible. Back to the drawing board O'Hanlon... The problem is that Petraeus’ numbers are “impossible” as DemocracyArsenal and my blog [1boringoldman] both reported as soon as the Pentagon Report came out. Comparing their data shows that Petraeus has several months with negative numbers for casualties – obviously impossible.

Back to the drawing board O’Hanlon…

]]> By: dixie blood http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4102163 dixie blood Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:41:07 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4102163 <em>Can we say ‘buddies’..? Comment by tarazan — October 2, 2007 @ 5:51 pm</em> Is it just me or is this on of the gayest military photos ever? <b>Faaabuuulouuss!!!</b> Can we say ‘buddies’..?

Comment by tarazan — October 2, 2007 @ 5:51 pm

Is it just me or is this on of the gayest military photos ever?

Faaabuuulouuss!!!

]]> By: Ret. Col. Jack Ripper http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4102048 Ret. Col. Jack Ripper Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:39:51 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4102048 Evil Bush stooge on Patraeus: "I find you more honorable than all those currently running for public office. I believe they are the true power loving stooges." Hey, stupid, he just announced last week that he wants to run for public office. Evil Bush stooge on Patraeus: “I find you more honorable than all those currently running for public office. I believe they are the true power loving stooges.”

Hey, stupid, he just announced last week that he wants to run for public office.

]]> By: Ret. Col. Jack Ripper http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4102046 Ret. Col. Jack Ripper Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:37:57 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4102046 Help me out here, conservatives. Why is it "hating America" to question O'Hanlon and Patraeus, but not "hating America" to question the Pentagon? Help me out here, conservatives. Why is it “hating America” to question O’Hanlon and Patraeus, but not “hating America” to question the Pentagon?

]]> By: Ryan Neat http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4102022 Ryan Neat Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:26:38 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4102022 <em>It looks as if libs dont like to BBQ or watch bigscreen tv. They must feel righteous as they tear into a petite veggie-burger while squinting at a 9 inch black and white. Comment by Caring Liberal — October 2, 2007 @ 6:12 pm</em> It looks like you got into your daddie's meth stash again... It looks as if libs dont like to BBQ or watch bigscreen tv. They must feel righteous as they tear into a petite veggie-burger while squinting at a 9 inch black and white.
Comment by Caring Liberal — October 2, 2007 @ 6:12 pm

It looks like you got into your daddie’s meth stash again…

]]> By: Nevar http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4102007 Nevar Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:16:24 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4102007 Gotta go, trollies, Seymour Hersch is on Democracy Now, the squash blossoms are frying and the bison's on the spit.... Gotta go, trollies, Seymour Hersch is on Democracy Now, the squash blossoms are frying and the bison’s on the spit….

]]> By: bob h http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4101994 bob h Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:09:58 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4101994 My idea to pay for the war: a $.01 tax on finger sandwiches, interpretive dances, sit-ins, Che shirts, communist pamphlets and fainting spells after uttering the words “President Bush”. Shoot, the influx of cash from Seattle alone would erase the deficit by next week and pay off the future war against Iran by the end of the month. Comment by Rovian Stormtrooper Commander — October 2, 2007 @ 6:09 pm squidwardon spongebob might noticeit My idea to pay for the war: a $.01 tax on finger sandwiches, interpretive dances, sit-ins, Che shirts, communist pamphlets and fainting spells after uttering the words “President Bush”.

Shoot, the influx of cash from Seattle alone would erase the deficit by next week and pay off the future war against Iran by the end of the month.

Comment by Rovian Stormtrooper Commander — October 2, 2007 @ 6:09 pm

squidwardon spongebob might noticeit

]]> By: bob h http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4101991 bob h Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:09:23 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4101991 considering a tax on nascar tickets make it 100$ or they wont notice the difference - those things are bloody expensive considering a tax on nascar tickets make it 100$ or they wont notice the difference – those things are bloody expensive

]]> By: Nevar http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4101987 Nevar Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:08:32 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4101987 Put a surtax on flatscreens over 30 inches, barbecue grills, and soft sofas that the average bubba sinks into more than 6 inches. Put a surtax on flatscreens over 30 inches, barbecue grills, and soft sofas that the average bubba sinks into more than 6 inches.

]]> By: Ryan Neat http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4101981 Ryan Neat Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:03:32 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4101981 <em>Moron AND idiot? So I take it that you dont want to be friends? Comment by Caring Liberal — October 2, 2007 @ 5:46 pm</em> This question explains why you have none of them. Moron AND idiot?
So I take it that you dont want to be friends?
Comment by Caring Liberal — October 2, 2007 @ 5:46 pm

This question explains why you have none of them.

]]> By: Ryan Neat http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4101979 Ryan Neat Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:02:28 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4101979 Why does Ohanlon hate the Pentagon and the Military so much? Why does Ohanlon hate the Pentagon and the Military so much?

]]> By: Krazny http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/comment-page-1/#comment-4101972 Krazny Tue, 02 Oct 2007 21:59:48 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/ohanlon-attacks-pentagon/#comment-4101972 My idea to pay for the war, a $.50 surtax, on bait, animal beer, nascar tickets, and other nascar merchandise. Might help cover the costs at least. My idea to pay for the war, a $.50 surtax, on bait, animal beer, nascar tickets, and other nascar merchandise. Might help cover the costs at least.

]]>