Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   Here comes the "War by euphemism." I'm gonna blow up Assad's missiles if you know what I mean? I'll even fluff your Garfield if you know what I'm talkin' about   (politico.com ) divider line
    More: Amusing, Wesley Clark, Foreign relations of the United States, missiles, Senate Foreign Relations Committee  
•       •       •

484 clicks; posted to Politics » on 05 Sep 2013 at 9:29 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



73 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-09-05 08:29:06 AM  
We aren't willing to do enough to accomplish anything, so let's not do anything, the outcome will be the same and we get to save several hundred million.
 
2013-09-05 09:33:12 AM  
A war by another other name.
 
2013-09-05 09:34:59 AM  

EvilEgg: We aren't willing to do enough to accomplish anything, so let's not do anything, the outcome will be the same and we get to save several hundred million.


I'm not of the opinion we can accomplish anything even if we jumped in feet first.  Who's the "good guys" and who's the "bad guys?"
 
2013-09-05 09:36:05 AM  
"First they steal the words, then they steal the meaning." ~George Orwell
 
2013-09-05 09:37:06 AM  
If you're not for bombing you're against the circumcised ones.
You can't run with the hare and hunt with the hounds.
 
2013-09-05 09:38:08 AM  
Politicians twisting the meanings of words?!  Never heard of such a thing!
 
2013-09-05 09:38:09 AM  
This is why we never declared war on Cleveland, even during the steamy summer.
 
2013-09-05 09:39:18 AM  
I keep forgetting if today is when Obama is a ruthless dictator, or whether he's an effete pushover.
 
2013-09-05 09:39:54 AM  

EvilEgg: We aren't willing to do enough to accomplish anything, so let's not do anything, the outcome will be the same and we get to save several hundred million.


Not to mention the hundreds or perhaps thousands of Syrians an intervention would kill for no purpose.


But money is important too I guess.
 
2013-09-05 09:40:12 AM  
We don't have wars with counties any more. Just wars on categories.
 
2013-09-05 09:40:32 AM  

T-Servo: I keep forgetting if today is when Obama is a ruthless dictator, or whether he's an effete pushover.


Thank god Rich Lowery will let you know.
 
2013-09-05 09:40:33 AM  
I like how she lied to her grandchild. What, exactly, does that say about your character that you lie to your loved ones. More so, what does it say about you that you compare your audience to a five year old?
 
2013-09-05 09:41:51 AM  

T-Servo: I keep forgetting if today is when Obama is a ruthless dictator, or whether he's an effete pushover.


whynotboth.jpg

It really depends on the issue. He's ruthless if it doesn't require much effort on his part, however, when there's actual thinking or making difficult decisions involved, especially if the challenge is coming from a foreign nation, he's a pushover.
 
2013-09-05 09:42:04 AM  

sendtodave: We don't have wars with counties any more. Just wars on categories.


To be fair, on fark we have a grinding war on grammar. Like all of these kinds of wars, fark is losing.
 
2013-09-05 09:42:06 AM  
I'm still wondering why we're talking about missiles or drones instead of some kind of "arrest and trial at the Hague" if you know what I mean...
 
2013-09-05 09:44:54 AM  

unlikely: I'm still wondering why we're talking about missiles or drones instead of some kind of "arrest and trial at the Hague" if you know what I mean...


Because senseless violence is easier than law enforcement?
 
2013-09-05 09:45:02 AM  

lockers: I like how she lied to her grandchild. What, exactly, does that say about your character that you lie to your loved ones. More so, what does it say about you that you compare your audience to a five year old?


Politicians can't lie. Same with lawyers.

They just find creative ways to tell the truth.
 
2013-09-05 09:45:44 AM  

lockers: sendtodave: We don't have wars with counties any more. Just wars on categories.

To be fair, on fark we have a grinding war on grammar. Like all of these kinds of wars, fark is losing.


What did gramma do to deserve that?
 
2013-09-05 09:46:06 AM  

Ned Stark: EvilEgg: We aren't willing to do enough to accomplish anything, so let's not do anything, the outcome will be the same and we get to save several hundred million.

Not to mention the hundreds or perhaps thousands of Syrians an intervention would kill for no purpose.


But money is important too I guess.


They're already dying by the thousands, so what's a little more?  People will still be dying if the U.S. does nothing, so I don't think that's the best argument against intervention.  There are so many better reasons.
 
2013-09-05 09:46:18 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: If you're not for bombing you're against the circumcised ones.
.

The three largest groups that are circumcised are Muslims, Jews, and Americans. Then the stuff about bunnies and dogs was just weird.

i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-09-05 09:46:44 AM  

unlikely: I'm still wondering why we're talking about missiles or drones instead of some kind of "arrest and trial at the Hague" if you know what I mean...


missiles and drones have a literal "hands-off" thing to it, whereas in order to arrest Assad, we need actual people on the ground to take him down, not get killed and then extract Assad out of the area and not get shot down before getting to a waiting carrier.

one is what the world's police force should do and one is what the world's police force can do.

/We're the World's Police Force because we're the only ones who can and will act
//if we didn't, international law would never be enforced.
 
2013-09-05 09:47:06 AM  

sendtodave: lockers: sendtodave: We don't have wars with counties any more. Just wars on categories.

To be fair, on fark we have a grinding war on grammar. Like all of these kinds of wars, fark is losing.

What did gramma do to deserve that?


She lied to a five year old, duh.
 
2013-09-05 09:47:13 AM  
""Now, he's five years old ... and he's saying 'war,'" she explained. "I mean, we're not talking about war, we're talking about an action here."

I'm pretty farking sure that if Syrian bombs started dropping on America we would be calling it a war without much hesitation. Why on earth would we expect Syrians to feel any different about American bombs?
 
2013-09-05 09:47:22 AM  
I've always been a fan of "kinetic engagement"
 
2013-09-05 09:47:25 AM  
Subby: NICE PANTS!
 
2013-09-05 09:47:35 AM  

DarnoKonrad: T-Servo: I keep forgetting if today is when Obama is a ruthless dictator, or whether he's an effete pushover.

Thank god Rich Lowery will let you know.


Yes, the same Rich Lowery who cheered on the invasion of Iraq, and argued in 2003 that Iraq was attracting terrorists due to the violence, but that was great because it meant we could more easily kill them in the open desert. Certainly a man who only attacks Obama's policies because he has serious reservations about foreign intervention.
 
2013-09-05 09:47:54 AM  
All war is by euphemism.

Congressman: "General, can you explain what you mean by "degrade and deter"?"

General: "Sure. First we are going to target all their air fields then all their command and control, then we are going to go after their air defenses with this new secret weapon we've developed. Then on day two we are going to go after all the generals to kill off their leadership. If you'd like, Congressman, I can draw a map with the teletsator complete with bombing times."
 
2013-09-05 09:48:13 AM  

lockers: sendtodave: lockers: sendtodave: We don't have wars with counties any more. Just wars on categories.

To be fair, on fark we have a grinding war on grammar. Like all of these kinds of wars, fark is losing.

What did gramma do to deserve that?

She lied to a five year old, duh.


You win.
 
2013-09-05 09:48:47 AM  
DarnoKonrad:   I'm not of the opinion we can accomplish anything even if we jumped in feet first.  Who's the "good guys" and who's the "bad guys?"

Seriously?  In the Middle East?  What part of Great Satan confuses you?
 
2013-09-05 09:50:31 AM  
But will you ruffle my Cleveland?
 
2013-09-05 09:51:08 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-09-05 09:52:35 AM  

wxboy: Ned Stark: EvilEgg: We aren't willing to do enough to accomplish anything, so let's not do anything, the outcome will be the same and we get to save several hundred million.

Not to mention the hundreds or perhaps thousands of Syrians an intervention would kill for no purpose.


But money is important too I guess.

They're already dying by the thousands, so what's a little more?  People will still be dying if the U.S. does nothing, so I don't think that's the best argument against intervention.  There are so many better reasons.


Wait, so bombing the piss out of people who are already fighting is a total ethical freebie regardless of context? That don't make no sense.
 
2013-09-05 09:58:49 AM  

T-Servo: DarnoKonrad: T-Servo: I keep forgetting if today is when Obama is a ruthless dictator, or whether he's an effete pushover.

Thank god Rich Lowery will let you know.

Yes, the same Rich Lowery who cheered on the invasion of Iraq, and argued in 2003 that Iraq was attracting terrorists due to the violence, but that was great because it meant we could more easily kill them in the open desert. Certainly a man who only attacks Obama's policies because he has serious reservations about foreign intervention.


Come to think of it, if we apply Lowery's 2003 logic to 2013, we should be bombing the shiat out of Syria right now. The civil war has attracted AQ and other extremist elements, so as long as they're in one place they make great target practice. Ad if we don't then soon enough they'll be lighting up bombs in the Newton, Iowa Piggly Wiggly.

/yes, I'm shooting the messenger, but this one deserves it
 
2013-09-05 10:00:33 AM  
media.salon.com
 
2013-09-05 10:00:39 AM  
The smoking cloud could come in the form of a mushroom.
 
2013-09-05 10:01:15 AM  

flubber: Subby: NICE PANTS!


TAPIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCA
 
2013-09-05 10:03:41 AM  

Wendy's Chili: [media.salon.com image 750x500]


okay, I gotta ask, since you dump and dive out of the threads after posting this guy. Who is he and what is the significance to you posting it in every goddamn thread I make (even those that weren't Politics tab)

I assumed he had something to do with Politico since you originally only posted in those threads, then you just started dumping it in all of the politics threads of mine that went green. Sooooo...is it a dig at my headlines, my sources or me?
 
2013-09-05 10:07:26 AM  

DarnoKonrad: I'm not of the opinion we can accomplish anything even if we jumped in feet first. Who's the "good guys" and who's the "bad guys?"


That's easy, we do the same thing we did in Iraq. Post a bunch of soldiers and Marines in and around Damascus, and whoever shoots at them are bad guys. Problem solved.
 
2013-09-05 10:09:28 AM  
Pelosi is right,  this is not a war it's an 'action'.     The very expensive TLAM cruise missiles that she will authorize to fire at Syrians will most likely hit buildings.... not people.

Oh sure, a few will blow up over an apartment building or a shopping center etc... but the vast majority will kill the people fighting.     And for the bystanders and children in Syria who get 'actioned',  they should at least be pleased to know that the 1,000lb warhead is so huge that it will pretty much blow the kids head clean off.

They'll never really kwow what happened.    So we have that going for us, in this 'action'.
 
2013-09-05 10:16:59 AM  
War? Oh, god, what? I didn't do it! I SWEAR I DIDN'T DO IT!
 
2013-09-05 10:24:13 AM  

Ned Stark: wxboy: Ned Stark: EvilEgg: We aren't willing to do enough to accomplish anything, so let's not do anything, the outcome will be the same and we get to save several hundred million.

Not to mention the hundreds or perhaps thousands of Syrians an intervention would kill for no purpose.


But money is important too I guess.

They're already dying by the thousands, so what's a little more?  People will still be dying if the U.S. does nothing, so I don't think that's the best argument against intervention.  There are so many better reasons.

Wait, so bombing the piss out of people who are already fighting is a total ethical freebie regardless of context? That don't make no sense.


It's not like a U.S. bomb kills people more dead than a Syrian bomb (unless one has sarin attached, I guess).  My point is that tossing a few tomahawks is not going to be substantially worse from a purely humanitarian standpoint than what's already happening there.

Now, from a policy or security standpoint, doing that could easily make things much worse for everybody (meaning more dead people).  But just using the argument that U.S. intervention is going to kill people hardly seems like a compelling reason by itself not to do it.
 
2013-09-05 10:33:17 AM  

neversubmit: "First they steal the words, then they steal the meaning." ~George Orwell


A couple of other Orwell favorites:

"There is something wrong with a regime that requires a pyramid of corpses every few years."

"In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
 
2013-09-05 10:37:35 AM  

wxboy: It's not like a U.S. bomb kills people more dead than a Syrian bomb (unless one has sarin attached, I guess). My point is that tossing a few tomahawks is not going to be substantially worse from a purely humanitarian standpoint than what's already happening there.


Which leaves out the ethical question of us having blood on our hands.
 
2013-09-05 10:40:40 AM  
Since when is the editor of National Review writing for Politico?

Oh.
 
2013-09-05 10:49:15 AM  
*Looks at where I'm sitting* Hey, there's blood on my stool!
 
2013-09-05 10:53:46 AM  

somedude210: Wendy's Chili: [media.salon.com image 750x500]

okay, I gotta ask, since you dump and dive out of the threads after posting this guy. Who is he and what is the significance to you posting it in every goddamn thread I make (even those that weren't Politics tab)

I assumed he had something to do with Politico since you originally only posted in those threads, then you just started dumping it in all of the politics threads of mine that went green. Sooooo...is it a dig at my headlines, my sources or me?


Not sure why he keeps posting but it's a picture of Mike Allen, an influential idiot savant who works for Politico.
 
2013-09-05 10:54:49 AM  

somedude210: Wendy's Chili: [media.salon.com image 750x500]

okay, I gotta ask, since you dump and dive out of the threads after posting this guy. Who is he and what is the significance to you posting it in every goddamn thread I make (even those that weren't Politics tab)

I assumed he had something to do with Politico since you originally only posted in those threads, then you just started dumping it in all of the politics threads of mine that went green. Sooooo...is it a dig at my headlines, my sources or me?


He's Mike Allen, cheif idiot at Tiger Beat on the Potomac.

And if he's really popping up in every single one of your threads, it's because you link to nothing but his beltway cum rag.
 
2013-09-05 10:58:00 AM  

lockers: wxboy: It's not like a U.S. bomb kills people more dead than a Syrian bomb (unless one has sarin attached, I guess). My point is that tossing a few tomahawks is not going to be substantially worse from a purely humanitarian standpoint than what's already happening there.

Which leaves out the ethical question of us having blood on our hands.


Some people would (and do) say that allowing the use of chemical weapons to go unpunished when we have the chance is just as bad.

Being for or against intervention is not as black and white as some people think.

/Devil's advocate.
 
2013-09-05 10:58:30 AM  
"Now, he's five years old ... and he's saying 'war,'" she explained. "I mean, we're not talking about war, we're talking about an action here."
 
It appears that Pelosi has found her intellectual superior.
 
2013-09-05 11:07:04 AM  

cirrhosis_and_halitosis: Not sure why he keeps posting but it's a picture of Mike Allen, an influential idiot savant who works for Politico.


oooooooooooooh okay. I figured as much

Wendy's Chili: And if he's really popping up in every single one of your threads, it's because you link to nothing but his beltway cum rag.


hey, even beltway cum rags need time in the public eye. I mean hell, we green WND here.

but you've also posted it in TPM links as well as some other non-Politico threads.

/I don't believe in what Politico believes
//sometimes you gotta mock them,
///and they give great material
 
Displayed 50 of 73 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report