Sunday, May 13, 2007
Scott "Chickenhawk" Ritter says we're worse than the Nazis.
No, really. Quite literally.
Here's the penultimate paragraph, which comes after lengthy passages badmouthing our troops:
Good thing he's not a Captain in the Marine Corps anymore. I don't think he'd survive his first firefight.
If y'all know what I'm sayin (andithinkyoudo).
Via Newsbusters.
Here's the penultimate paragraph, which comes after lengthy passages badmouthing our troops:
I yearn for a time when “good Americans” will be able to stop and reverse equally evil policies of global hegemony achieved through pre-emptive war of aggression. I know all too well that in this case the “enemy” will only be emboldened by our silence, since at the end of the day the “enemy” is ourselves. I can see the Harvard professor shaking an accusatory finger at me for the above statement, chiding me for creating any moral equivalency between the war in Iraq and the Holocaust. You’re right, Mr. Dershowitz. There is no moral equivalency. In America today, we should have known better, since we ostensibly stand for so much more. That we have collectively failed to halt and repudiate the war in Iraq makes us even worse than the Germans.
Good thing he's not a Captain in the Marine Corps anymore. I don't think he'd survive his first firefight.
If y'all know what I'm sayin (andithinkyoudo).
Via Newsbusters.
Comments:
So, where does Scott Ritter think the death camps are, the ones where supposedly over 10 million Iraqis have been murdered? There has to be such, if USA is to be worse than Germans in that regard. Or the slave labour? Are Iraqis working in US factories churning out war material? Man, I must have missed out a lot of news.
And yeah, he did not say anything about those numbers, just about not stopping the war. But how is that any worse than what Germany did? He lacks all logic there. Germany was not exactly Czar's Russia that was taken into war that it's people did not want. They did not exactly put up large resistance to Hitler's war ambitions, which were not about toppling dictatorships, but about spreading his direct rulership over other nations.
I suppose then, that Scott Ritter has a thing for dictatorships.
And yeah, he did not say anything about those numbers, just about not stopping the war. But how is that any worse than what Germany did? He lacks all logic there. Germany was not exactly Czar's Russia that was taken into war that it's people did not want. They did not exactly put up large resistance to Hitler's war ambitions, which were not about toppling dictatorships, but about spreading his direct rulership over other nations.
I suppose then, that Scott Ritter has a thing for dictatorships.
# posted by 
: 1:11 AM
: 1:11 AM
Jason: Your outrage is justified, and I'm sure, genuine.
I'm curious about your opinion: How much, if any, mainstream credibility does Ritter have left? Seems to me he went a little nuts when when his contrarian take on the pre-war intelligence was questioned. And hasn't he pretty much been a tool since his last (pre-invasion) trip to Baghdad?
Plus, the piece was posted on commondreams.org. He's pretty much *swimming* in the Kool-Aid at this point, no?
Post a Comment
I'm curious about your opinion: How much, if any, mainstream credibility does Ritter have left? Seems to me he went a little nuts when when his contrarian take on the pre-war intelligence was questioned. And hasn't he pretty much been a tool since his last (pre-invasion) trip to Baghdad?
Plus, the piece was posted on commondreams.org. He's pretty much *swimming* in the Kool-Aid at this point, no?
# posted by : 4:50 PM
: 4:50 PM
