Sponsored Content
« Later, Dudes, I'm Out Of Here; Wish Me Luck In My Next Career | Main | Ron Paul: A Speedboat Could Never Have Damaged A US Naval Warship »
January 11, 2008

Brit Hume: A Total Dick

I'm just kidding. I love Brit Hume.


He did seem to pursue a line of questioning for far too long to no good effect. He badgered all the candidates about whether or not they were content with the naval commanders' decision not to open fire on the harassing Iranian speedboats.

He didn't just ask the question. He badgered. It was a dumb question. No candidate on the stage has any idea what the navy's rules of engagement are. No one knows the exact protocols those commanders are under as regarding opening fire. Few know -- some know, but certainly not anyone except naval officers or naval buffs -- what the minimum safe distance is for any of these ships, that is, the point at which they'd more or less be obliged to open fire or else lose the possibility of bringing their defensive guns on to the target.

Most of this stuff is fairly classified, for reasons I think should be obvious. Even if a candidate knew all the variables that enter into this decision, prudence would dictate he not respond concretely. Let's say someone knew the commanders had actually allowed the speedboats past what the navy considers the minimum safe distance for engagement -- should a candidate announce that fact to the world?

I really did not see what possible information Hume sought to elicit here.

It's also a bit of a loaded question, in that harassing and provocative behavior like this is relatively common, and our officers are trained to allow a certain amount of it -- a certain safe amount of it -- before blowing foreign military craft to hell.

Was Brit Hume really suggesting that a candidate announce tonight that the Navy's new protocol should be "Shoot on Sight"? I don't think he had such a preposterous notion in mind. So what differences was he seeking to elicit from the candidates?

Note all of them answered the same, predictable, correct way: "Dude, what the hell do I know? I'm not in the frigging Navy, I'm not a trained Naval commander, and I wasn't freakin' there. What do you want me to say? Based on my very limited, incomplete second-hand knowledge of the situation, I think these commanders should be reprimanded and retrained for not opening fire?"

That's sort of a large judgment to make based upon such sketchy information. I'm sure the higher-ups in the Navy are reviewing the situation and the decision with all of the available information, but they're experts at this, and have real, complete information to make such judgments upon.

What does Mitt Romney know about it? Even John McCain doesn't know jack about it -- he flew a plane in the sixties. He could render an expert opinion on the rules of engagement regarding a sixties-era fighter harassing his squadron, but what the hell does he know about 2000's era destroyers and frigates?

The whole line of questioning was five wasted minutes that drew no distinctions and elicited no useful information.

Except, of course, by pure happenstance: Ron Paul was revealed to be a doddering old buffoon who can't even be bothered to listen to his rivals' answers. He only could have topped his embarrassing answer by suggesting the entire situation could have been avoided by adopting the Austrian gold standard.

Which I'm pretty sure he would have actually said, had Brit Hume not interrupted the demented old dickbag.

Trap Question? The only interesting answer that could have arisen was some knucklehead trying to pander to the crowd by saying, "Hell yeah! Kill 'em all! Those commanders were derelict of duty! String 'em up! Sometimes you have to hang a few admirals to encourage the others!"

Thus exposing himself as a jackass.

But how likely was this? Apparently not very likely at all. Even the pandering Huckabee managed to grok that he really wasn't qualified to render much of judgment on this at all.

"I'd listen to what my advisers tell me" or "I'd heed the counsel of my generals" are never very interesting answers, and sometimes they're transparent dodges.

But here? Regarding second-by-second decision-making in a, um, fluid situation in which the rules of engagement are top secret? There can be no good answer except "I trust, provisionally, that the commanders acted properly and unless I'm informed otherwise I'm satisfied with their conduct."

Speaking of Incomplete Information... That radio threat made against the ships might not have been made against the ships at all. Or even have originated from the speedboats or Iran.

Gulf Threat May Not Have Come from Iranians, Pentagon Says

By Robin Wright

(c) 2008, The Washington Post

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon said Thursday that the radio threat to bomb U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf last weekend may not have come from the five Iranian Revolutionary Guard speedboats that approached them — and may not even have been intended against U.S. targets.

The communication Sunday was made on radio channel 16, a common marine frequency used by ships and others in the region. "It could have been a threat aimed at some other nation or a myriad of other things," said Rear Adm. Frank Thorp IV, a spokesman for the Navy.

In the radio message recorded by the Navy, a heavily accented voice said, "I am coming to you. You will explode after a few minutes." But Farsi speakers and Iranians told The Washington Post that the accent did not sound Iranian.

In part because of the threatening language, the United States has elevated the encounter into an international incident. Twice this week, President Bush criticized Iran's behavior as provocative and warned of "serious consequences" if it happens again. He is due to head Friday to the Gulf, where containing Iran is expected to be a major theme of his talks in five oil-rich sheikdoms.

Maybe, maybe not. This report could be wrong, of course, put out by the Iran apologists in our government.

Or it could be accurate.

Ron Paul mentioned this. It's, you know, another Gulf of Tonkin.

Thanks to Rocket's Brain Trust.

digg this
posted by Ace at 01:53 AM

| Access Comments

Recent Comments
Thesokorus: "Isn't the whole point of a diary that some other g ..."

[/i][/s][/b][/u]blaster: "[i]Does sra blaster know about this??? Posted by: ..."

Legally Sufficient: "Thanks for the dandy ONT, Mis Hum! Spectacular ..."

Beartooth: "Don't worry about holding off filing your federal ..."

Zettai: " Emerald Robinson calls Twitter's Yoel Roth a " ..."

[/i][/s][/b][/u]blaster: "[i]19 So, if we did blow up the pipeline, is it an ..."

OrangeEnt: "And against whom, Russia or Germany? Posted by: ..."

Helena Handbasket: ">>> 19 So, if we did blow up the pipeline, is it a ..."

GWB: "[i]an anonymous source “with direct knowledg ..."

Commissar Hrothgar (hOUT3) ~ Next year in Corsicana - again! ~ [/i][/b][/u][/s]: "Back during the covid fiasco, a friend of mine alw ..."

Helena Handbasket: ">>> 22 20 Boebert link doesn't got Boebert. Poste ..."

Piper : "https://youtu.be/rmuudxyM0t4 ..."

Recent Entries

Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64