Now We've Got Them Right Where We Want Them

By -
On a day when 10 separate attacks killed 47 people in Iraq, Donald Rumsfeld
declared that the insurgency -- which, you remember, was to disappear after Saddam was captured, or when sovereignty was turned over, or when the elections were held, or when the new government was formed -- is likely to increase until the constitution referendum and the elections are held in December. He also mentioned that the insurgency may continue for a decade or more. So when Rummy told Fox News Sunday that the insurgency "ebbs and flows", he really meant to say that it "flows and flows".

Comments

  1. Anonymous8:44 AM

    I'm confused. The part where Rummy says the insuegency
    could last a decade directly contradicts what Cheney
    just said, "...that the insurgency was in its last throes."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous4:13 AM

    A decade sure doesn't sound like much if you consider the start of the insurgency to have been during the crusades.

    ReplyDelete
  3. gcallah2:33 PM

    And if you consider the insurgency to have started during the late Devonian epoch, a decade would seem like even less!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous3:36 PM

    And Rumsfeld did mention Cheney's remarks in the FoxNews interview. According to Rummy in an attempt to clarify Cheney's statement, "The fact is that if you look at the context of his remarks, last throes could be a violent last throe, just as well as a placid or calm last throe. Look it up in the dictionary." - So to sum this up ladies and gents, - this is a VIOLENT last throe that could last for decades... glad that's all cleared up.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160643,00.html

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more