Liberal Chickenhawks

The Jeff Goldstein Experience thread has provided us with a whole bunch of low-functioning trolls trotting out the "chickenhawk" insult.

To which I have four questions:

1) What is a "chickenhawk," precisely? It is someone who supports a war but does not enlist to fight it, yes-yes?

2) Do you support the War in Afghanistan? Most liberals say yes to this, as they want to prove they're reasonable and not simply dopey pacifists.

3) Did you enlist to fight in the War in Afghanistan? Of course you didn't. (Well, of course some small number did, but certainly not the trolls here.)

4) Doesn't that make you therefore a "chickenhawk" -- supporting a war you do not volunteer to fight in?

Most liberals haven't even thought about this, and so will initially gasp at the implications. Once they're done sputtering in cognitive dissonance, they will say, "Well, no, the original definition I agreed to, before I realized it would be used against me, is wrong. It is not supporting any war in which you do not fight which makes you a chickenhawk; it is supporting an illegal war on a sovereign country without UN permission in a unilateral war of choice without enlisting that makes you a chickenhawk."

And if that doesn't restrict it enough, perhaps they can add, "...fought against a country located east of Jordan and west of Iran, north of Kuwait and south of Turkey, which didn't pose a threat to anyone, ever, and spent all its pre-war time flying colorful kites, as seen in Fahrenheit 911."

Whatever.

If you didn't support the War in Afghanistan either, then you're not a chickenhawk, you're just a vapid ninny whose opinions should be entirely discarded as lunatic.

And, you know, you're a pure straight chickenshit appeaser, too.

Corrected the east-west screw-up. I always mess that up.

I'm a bear with north-south, though.

posted by Ace at 05:42 PM

| Access Comments