Now up to 70% less Daily!

Monday, June 2, 2014

A disgraceful spectacle

I know, I know, I've been neglectful of my blogging duties lately.
Because I've been busy.

Doing stuff.

Geez, get off my back! You're not even my real dad!

But anyway. . . .

What I have been seeing on the intertubes lately seems to be the right careening from one disgraceful spectacle to another. From the disgraceful spectacle of the right wing trying to make excuses for a sonofabitch that killed a bunch of people because he couldn't get laid, to the spectacle of the "support the troops" crowd being infuriated at the idea of bringing the troops home from the pointless brutality of Afghanistan. And now the shameful spectacle of right-wingers frothingly angry about a United States soldier being freed from an Afghan prison.

For one, there was asylum escapee Allen West who though that there must be something suspicious about a United States President working to free a United States POW.

. . . there is more to this than meets the eye of Obama making a unilateral decision and announcement on a Saturday — when he believes no one is watching.
This is not just going to slip away and we’re not going to get caught up in the emotion of Bergdahl’s release. He wasn’t “captured” — he deserted his assigned post.

 One would think that the "unilateralsim" of Obama's "decision" would really not be an issue. One would think that the decision to free a United States soldier would really not be something that anyone else would need to weigh in on.One might think that, but then one would not be insane.



http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/allenwest.jpg
Also, did Sergeant  Bergdahl actually desert his post? I don't know, but I'll bet you any money that neither does Allen West. 
But if Bergdahl, did desert, then should he not be brought back to the US to face a court martial? I can't imagine that there is any circumstance under which the military protocol is "let the guy rot in some foreign hellhole prison."
And there was horrible Congressthing Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) who thinks that it's all fine and good to get a United Staes soldier back home, but you really got to do some comparison shopping to make sure you're getting a bargain:

Chaffetz: But of course we want to bring our American home, but at what price?

Chaffetz: The price is not just dealing with a third party. We've actually got some decent relationships there with the Qatar government and whatnot, but you took the starting five, the big five. 


God damn it, those were the best five we had! It's like, sure we got our guy back, but we gave them the Mickey Mantle rookie card when we could have gotten away with an '84 Kirby Puckett!

So, were those five actually the five biggest terrorists we had? I don't know, and I'll bet you any money that neither does Jason Chaffetz.


These are some of the worst most nefarious characters on the face of the planet that have been responsible for allegedly for killing thousands of people. That's why we had them in Guantanamo Bay 

Unassailable logic! We know they're bad because otherwise why would we have imprisoned them?  You know, everyone we imprison is obviously guilty, that's why we don't have to bother having trials!


Ex-Bush Official: Many at Guantanamo Bay Are Innocent

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico -- Many detainees locked up at Guantanamo were innocent men swept up by U.S. forces unable to distinguish enemies from noncombatants, a former Bush administration official said Thursday.
"There are still innocent people there," Lawrence B. Wilkerson, a Republican who was chief of staff to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, told The Associated Press. "Some have been there six or seven years."


http://i.imgur.com/yxMr71u.gif


Oh, right! I totally forgot that lots of Gitmo prisoners have turned out to be totally innocent!


And of course, the quivering moustache of rage, John Bolton, had to weigh in with his reasons why it's so terrible that the President managed to free a US POW.

Fox neocon John Bolton: Obama ‘despicable’ for swapping American POW for Gitmo detainees

http://th09.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/f/2013/154/e/5/daffy_duck_photoshop_by_knightofzero0-d67n4h3.jpg 

http://verysmartbrothas.com/images/Do-not-think-it-means.jpeg?c07647  



“The president has sent the Taliban an unmistakable signal that he will pay any price to get the United States out, and that’s a signal that’s bad for Taliban and al Qaeda to hear and our adversaries around the world,” Bolton opined. “And perhaps even worse, it is despicable for a president of the United States to grant moral equivalence to these terrorist in Gitmo compared to an American servicemember. The idea that there’s any equivalence at all between and American soldier and a terrorist, I think, is reprehensible.” 

Um, I think the signal the President sent was that the war is over so let's do some prisoner exchanges like countries always do at the end of wars? Even when the country you're fighting is Nazi Germany? Was that making a "moral equivalence" between American GIs and fucking Nazis? I would say no, but then again, I'm not insane.

http://images.politico.com/global/news/110715_john_bolton_ap_328.jpg


Although I guess it might have sent a better message if he had said to the Taliban "hey, go ahead and just keep one of our finest young men in one of your shithole prisons." Then they'd know how tough we are. That would make us look way tougher than putting a bullet through Osama bin Laden's eye or constantly blowing people up with drones or spending thirteen fucking years of mayhem and bloodshed in Afghanistan with pretty much nothing to show for it.

“Look, if the Taliban had said, ‘Give us $100 million and we’ll give you back Bergdahl,’ would we have done that?” Bolton asked. “Of course not. They say, ‘Give us five terrorists,’ and we do. That is both negotiating with terrorists and moral equivalence. They’re both bad mistakes by the president.”


Right. Everyone knows you don't negotiate with terrorists. If the terrorists take one of your guys hostage, you simply sell them missles and funnel the profits to a different group of terrorists that you like better. Like, say, in Nicaragua.

 But perhaps the cake-taker in this falderal festival is the self-aggrandizing sack of delusional shit known as Ted Cruz.

Ted Cruz: I would have used military force to rescue Afghan POW Bergdahl

“I do not think the way to deal with terrorists is through releasing other violent terrorists. I mean…” Cruz said. . .
“It’s not the only way. We can go in and use military force, as needed, to rescue our fallen compatriots. 

 Oh, use military force? In Afghanistan? Why didn't anyone think of that? If only Ted Cruz had been there to suggest the idea of sending American soldiers into Afghanistan! Where, God knows, there is just absolutely no US military presence at all.

Does he not think that the US military has been looking for Bergdahl? If they knew where he was being held, don't you think Navy Seals would have gone all Captain Philips on whatever punks were holding him?

  http://www.bartcop.com/cruz-idiot-cannada.jpg


Today's Republican Party, one disgraceful spectacle after another.

1 comment:

anne marie in philly said...

why don't we send cruz and bolton and mccain and all the other naysayers over to afghanistan in exchange for our soldier? sounds like a good use of manpower to me!