WaPo Blogger: Soldiers Are Lucky We "Indulge" Them For Their Rapes And Murders, And Be Happy We Don't Spit On Them

And yes, he then rounds it off by snarking:

But it is the United States and instead this NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.

The big problem with kicking this little sissy's ass is that it would be too goddamned easy.

Did I say "problem"? I meant "bonus."

Yes, it's a good thing that the WaPo and other media outlets don't hire, say, me as a blogger. I mean, it's not like I know how to do it. Better to hire some little pinko tosser who knows how to pull in literally dozens of eyeballs.

And I use lots of spicy language and stuff -- I mean, you can't have that sort of that sort of trash bringing disrepute on your organization, right? I might actually write something excessive and controversial.

Bonus Material: (Like how I did that?)

Who'd've imagined he'd look something like this?

Or (badly) write agitprop like this?

I can imagine some post-9/11 moment, when the American people say enough already with the wars against terrorism and those in the national security establishment feel these same frustrations. In my little parable, those in leadership positions shake their heads that the people don't get it, that they don't understand that the threat from terrorism, while difficult to defeat, demands commitment and sacrifice and is very real because it is so shadowy, that the very survival of the United States is at stake. Those Hoover's and Nixon's will use these kids in uniform as their soldiers. If I weren't the United States, I'd say the story end with a military coup where those in the know, and those with fire in their bellies, save the nation from the people.

Now, it's hard to tell because his thoughts are incoherent and his syntax is, let us say, hypermodern (not like those are important when it comes to writing anyhow), but I do think this gibbering little chimp is posting fantasias about armed insurrections against the legal, democratic government of the US, no?

No: Allah explains that what he's suggesting is that the military is now so divorced from public opinion it will feel the need to state a military coup against the government, in order to save the people from their own non-troop-supporting ways.

Slightly less controversial -- but not really. So he's not calling for a revolution, he's merely saying our troops and generals are inclined to stage an auto-gulpe. (I should note that I'm not sure I spelled that right, or if it's actually the right word, but I just couldn't write "coup" again.)

I'll accept that the soldiers, in order to soldier on, have to believe that they are manning the parapet, and that's where their frustrations come in. I'll accept as well that they are young and naïve and are frustrated with their own lack of progress and the never changing situation in Iraq. Cut off from society and constantly told that everyone supports them, no wonder the debate back home confuses them.

Well, one thing the soldiers are likely confused by is this entire "essay," because the shithead really, honestly cannot write coherently.

But he's expressing his rage, and, I suppose, that's all that counts for the left.

Who did he sleep with to get this gig? And can I get his number?

Not Just A Blogger! Apparently he's their "national security reporter."

Ah.

Well, I sit corrected.

I'm sure he brings this level of dispassionate, agenda-free professionalism to his expert reporting work as well.

Hugh Hewitt On Willaim Arkin: A Greenpeace activist (i.e., professional leftist), you'll be shocked to discover.

Dr. Rock wants to take this little tosser on a few patrols in Iraq.

I think that's inadvisable. He's too fat to easily carry and the smell of defecation would get pretty bad in the Iraqi sun.

posted by Ace at 08:10 PM

| Access Comments