Politics, Foreign Policy, Current Events and Occasional Outbursts Lacking Couth

Saturday, May 10, 2008


When abject ignorance collides with a deep seated sense of narcissism you get this steaming mound of dog vomit:


So, 4000 rubes are dead. Cry me the Tigris. Another 30,000 have been seriously wounded. Boo f*cking hoo. They got what they asked for—and cool robotic limbs, too.

Likely, just reading the above paragraph made you uncomfortable. But why?

The benevolence of America’s “troops” is sacrosanct. Questioning their rectitude simply
isn’t done. It’s the forbidden zone. We may rail against this tragic war, but our soldiers are lauded by all as saints. Why? They volunteered to partake in this savage idiocy, and for this they deserve our utmost respect? I think not.

The nearly two-thirds of us who know this war is bullsh*t need to stop sucking off the troops. They get enough action raping female soldiers and sodomizing Iraqi detainees. The political left is intent on “supporting” the troops by bringing them home, which is a good thing. But after rightly denouncing the administration’s lies and condemning this awful war, relatively sensible pundits—like Keith
Olbermann—turn around and lovingly praise the soldiers’ brave service to the country. Why?

What service are they providing? I don’t remember ordering 300,000 dead Iraqis—although I was doing a lot of heavy narcotics back in ‘03. Our soldiers are not providing a service to the country, they’re providing a service to a criminal administration and their oil company cronies. When a mafia don orders a hit, is the assassin absolved of personal responsibility when it’s carried out? Of course not. What if the hit man was fooled into service? We’d all say, “Tough sh*t, you dumb Guido,” then lock him up and throw away the key.

As a society, we need to discard our blind deference to military service. There’s nothing admirable about volunteering to murder people. There’s nothing admirable about being rooked by obvious propaganda. There’s nothing admirable about doing what you’re told if what you’re told to do is terrible.

We all learned recently that the Bush administration instituted its policy of global torture during quaint White House meetings. And we already know this war was started with lies. Shame on them. But what about the people who physically carry out these atrocities? We’
ve seen bad apples punished and CEO despots walk free, but all verbal and written denouncement is focused on our leaders. Surely, they deserve that and more—decapitation, really. But why can’t we be critical of the people who have actually tortured and murdered hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens? We deride private contractors like Blackwater for similar conduct—why are the troops blameless?

The epitome of "look at me" ignorance devoid of any constructive thought and driven entirely by the want for attention. This is definitively the lowest rung of analysis, quite obviously designed to excite a mindless minority that will swallow such abject nonsense. In essence, complete garbage. (Nod to Ymarsakar for bringing this bit of steaming dogsh*t to my attention.)


G said...

According to Wikipedia the website is mirrored on the russian online mag "the eXile." That means a lot of the articles are sensationalistic crap for the sake of sensationalism (which holds true for some of the stuff online, apparently Tom Cruise tried to sue this particular website). It certainly raised my ire.

I also like how he said "Americans fear the truth," as if his position was justified and true, yet he argues that truth doesn't matter anymore -- Bombastic rhetoric, executions, and responding with ad hominems and sensationalism does.

A piss-poor argument from a moron that is the very product of a system that he hates.

ortho said...

M├╝nzenberg said, "A piss-poor argument from a moron that is the very product of a system that he hates."

If this is the case, a system that produces garbage must be destroyed. Perhaps, after all, education is the waste product of American higher education.

G said...

Ortho, that was what I was semi-alluding too, but perhaps in not such extremes and not so much to do with education.

Although it could be read that way.

I was thinking he is a product of a political-entertainment exchange system that revels in childish, entertaining, rhetorical crap and that he just bought in on it. But education could be seen a source of that.

Steve said...

Why link to the trolls? It's only a desperate plea for attention. A grievance is usually held because it's the only reason for living after all.

Jay@Soob said...

Too true, Steve. I was reluctant but such abject shit rhetoric needed an addition to ymarsakar's effort to lay the definitive case. I read plenty of hollow nonsense each day but this bit got under my skin in a particular fashion.

Ymarsakar said...

Fighting a war requires that you listen to, read up on, and spread information about the enemy. This is why United States military personnel watch Al Jazeera English, to get a sort of grasp on what the media and propaganda operations are Arabs seeing.

If you refuse to listen to the beliefs of the enemy and if you refuse to allow other people to know of such things, then you're just going to be kept in a bubble until the barbarians come to burn you out of the bubble.

Ymarsakar said...

It's notable because after 2001, there was a certain political cost to hitting the US military.

It is, thus, notable that such sentiments or political costs no longer exist or have decreased to the point where people now feel free to speak up without censure.

You can get a lot on a person's psychological state just by looking at their behavior over the years.