Strict Standards: Redefining already defined constructor for class wpdb in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 57

Strict Standards: Redefining already defined constructor for class WP_Object_Cache in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/cache.php on line 384

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::start_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::start_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/classes.php on line 541

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::end_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::end_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/classes.php on line 541

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/classes.php on line 541

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::end_el() should be compatible with Walker::end_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/classes.php on line 541

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_PageDropdown::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/classes.php on line 560

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::start_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::start_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/classes.php on line 659

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::end_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::end_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/classes.php on line 659

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/classes.php on line 659

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::end_el() should be compatible with Walker::end_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/classes.php on line 659

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_CategoryDropdown::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/classes.php on line 684

Strict Standards: Non-static method sem_admin_menu::init() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-content/plugins/sem-admin-menu/sem-admin-menu.php on line 358

Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method sem_admin_menu::ob_add_menu() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 164

Warning: ob_start(): non-static method sem_admin_menu::ob_add_menu_callback() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-content/plugins/sem-admin-menu/sem-admin-menu.php on line 86

Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method sem_admin_menu::kill_gzip() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler » Another Hollyweird Anti-War Box Office Bomb Headed This Way
Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::add_css() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 164

Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::add_js() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 164
You are viewing the Archives for 2007.......If you want the current page, CLICK HERE.......

This one, “Stop-Loss”, has as its central premise that our volunteers are too damn stoopid to read contracts.

Oh, and War Bad™, Troops Killers™, Stuck in Iraq™, Ig’nant Southerners With Hearts of Gold™ yadda, yadda, yadda.

All it needs is a touch of Teh Ghey and you’ve got another Instant Oscar That Nobody’s Actually Paid Money to Watch™.

If you can stand it, here’s the trailer.

We suspect that it will be every bit as much of a box office hit as “Rendition”, which currently has pirates disguising their torrents as recordings of C-SPAN in order to get people to even think about downloading it.

20 Responses to “Another Hollyweird Anti-War Box Office Bomb Headed This Way”
  1. Deathknyte Comment by Deathknyte

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    Yet another stupid movie from hollywierd. You would have thought they learned something from the 300 phenomenon.

  2. Muzzy Comment by Muzzy

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    Misha wrote:

    This one, “Stop-Loss”, has as its central premise that our volunteers are too damn stoopid to read contracts.

    One can’t blame them for any misunderstanding, as the legality of the stop-loss policy is still being debated in both Public and Federal court. America’s Cretin in Chief, and pols like him who have no compunction about jerking soldiers about like marionettes, justify the stop-loss policy with reference to paragraph 9(c) which states: “In the event of war, my enlistment in the Armed Forces continues until six months after the war ends, unless the enlistment is ended sooner by the President of the United States”

    However, in the current situation, where Congress has not actually declared war, the instigation of the stop loss policy seems a clear violation of both the letter and the spirit of the law. In effect, enactment of the stop loss policy turns every soldier into a potentially lifelong member of the U.S. Army.

    Oh, and War Bad™,

    The war is bad. It is, was, and always will be, a horrific waste of lives, money, and goodwill and is already on the way to becoming regarded as the worst foreign policy blunder in living memory.

    Troops Killers™,

    Well, the trailer I saw featured returning soldiers being driven through ticker tape parades on streets lined with civilians holding signs saying “We love our boys”. It also contains the following tag lines:

    “You Fought For America”
    “You Fought For Family”
    “You Fought For Freedom”
    “You Gave Everything”
    “They Want More”

    The operative word of each tag line is the first one. This trailer isn’t attacking soldiers. It’s addressing soldiers. It’s saying that they fought with noble intentions but ended up getting fucked over by Uncle Sam, which, as it turns out, is pretty much exactly what happened.

    Stuck in Iraq™,

    We are stuck in Iraq.

    Ig’nant Southerners With Hearts of Gold™ yadda, yadda, yadda.

    Again, where do you get this from? The trailer I saw didn’t imply anything like this.

    Frankly, I think it looks like a decent film. It’s directed by Kimberley Pierce, who has a good track record, stars Ryan Phillippe and Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who are both decent actors, and has a soundtrack featuring Snow Patrol, who are awesome. And even if it didn’t have any of that, I’d still go and see it to find out who that cute blonde chick is.

  3. Unregistered Comment by nerbygirl

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    Does anyone here remember anti-war movies being shown while our soldiers were fighting in Vietnam?
    I was too young to remember. It seems to me that movies like “Deer Hunter” and the like happened AFTER the war was over.

    I truly believe that the Left WANT us to lose. Everyone here should check out Michael Yon’s recent post at michaelyon.com and read his take on it. He explains how we are actually WINNING over in Iraq, and how he was shocked to come back to the States and hear the constant stream of lies from the MSM.

    I hope the backers of that film lose every penny that they invested. Traitorous, lying bastards.

  4. Brian the sailor Comment by Brian the sailor

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    Heck, and I was planning on retiring in a couple of months. Now it looks like they’ll never let me out. [/sarcasm]

    I didn’t watch the trailer. The smoke out here is enough to make a grown sailor nauseous, and I didn’t want to risk any more irritation.

  5. Emperor Misha I Comment by Emperor Misha I

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    However, in the current situation, where Congress has not actually declared war,

    Alright, then. If you can come up with a set in stone, crystal clear definition of when the country is at war, what it requires for it to be at war and just how that point is reached, I congratulate you. Because you will have achieved something that no Constitutional scholar has achieved over a mere two centuries. But I’m sure you’re up to it. No, it doesn’t require a deliberate, artful declaration done in pretty calligraphy. Just thought I’d help you out there. The “we’re not really at war” nonsense makes for a great sound bite, but that’s about the end of it.

    But go ahead. Make my day.

    The war is bad.

    But the alternative is worse. Unless you’re al-Qaeda, that is. Are you?

    Well, the trailer I saw featured returning soldiers being driven through ticker tape parades on streets lined with civilians holding signs saying “We love our boys”.

    And you must have fallen asleep before the “do you remember what we did” line and the tears rolling down cheeks. I could be wrong, but somehow I don’t suspect they were referring to rebuilding orphanages, distributing candy or killing Hajis.

    But I could be wrong. If so, it would be a first for Hollyweird and their consistent barrage of objectively pro-terrorist propaganda.

    The operative word of each tag line is the first one. This trailer isn’t attacking soldiers. It’s addressing soldiers. It’s saying that they fought with noble intentions but ended up getting fucked over by Uncle Sam, which, as it turns out, is pretty much exactly what happened.

    Oh yes. They’re addressing soldiers alright. Just like these swine. (Where the fuck is Kent State when we need one???) They’re telling them that it’s all pointless, that it’s all for nothing, that your leaders are wrong, that al-Qaeda is right, blah, blah, blah. Add a funny accent and a few lines about Jodies screwing their girlfriends at home and Lord Haw-Haw and the Tokyo Rose would be proud.

    Which, according to you, is absolutely correct. But then again, I’d expect that sort of thing from you.

    Again, where do you get this from? The trailer I saw didn’t imply anything like this.

    I’ll give you a pass for this since you’re a furriner, but anybody over here would recognize thick Southern accents like that without even trying.

    All they needed was a few pickup trucks with the Stars and Bars on ‘em and it would be a perfect Hollyweird stereotype.

    I hope they all burn to fucking death, the useless fifth columnist swine.

  6. BauerPower Comment by BauerPower

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    Expect this sucker to tank, just like Rendition did. Anyone who has to have their politics defined by some simplistic crap of Hollywood tripe, is truly a cretin. So, let’s look at the troop bash box offices on Valley of Elah, and Rendition. Both not so hot. Critics love it, of course, since they grew up hating the baby killers versus saluting the Green Berets. Expect Lions With Lambs and Stop Loss to get some inflated reviews, and a strong word of blog to the libs to go see it, buy tickets for multiple showings (sounds like voting multiple times), but in the end, expect this to fizzle like the rest. Sorry, war sucks, but bashing the USA and the troops won’t be a good business decision in the long run. In fact, those who saw movies once in a while, may not do so again, due to this latest slap in the face.

    OK, let’s pick apart some of the logic here of the usual liberals who defend this crap….

    I think it looks like a decent film. It’s directed by Kimberley Pierce, who has a good track record, stars Ryan Phillippe and Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who are both decent actors, and has a soundtrack featuring Snow Patrol, who are awesome.

    Kimberly Pierce, sorry never heard of her.

    Ryan Phillippe? Formerly Mr. Reese Witherspoon (of Rendition)? Yeah, he had such a stellar career didn’t he. Marry Reese, shoot out some kids, and then get divorced. Sounds like an upscale and metrosexual Kevin Federline. Ryan may have had a decent role in Flags of Our Fathers, but that was an ensemble cast.

    Joseph Gordon-Levitt? The kid from 3rd Rock from the Sun. Stellar actor. So good, he got his head axed in Halloween H20, and was smacked around in 10 Things I Hate About You. That kid has Oscar written all over him (stifling laughter)

    I cry :em72: to that.

    The war is bad. It is, was, and always will be, a horrific waste of lives, money, and goodwill and is already on the way to becoming regarded as the worst foreign policy blunder in living memory.

    No shit, really? Well, let’s see, WWII turned out better than just letting the Swastika and Rising Sun dominate America and the rest of world, didn’t it, sonny? Or do you think WWII was something we should have sat out of til after all the Joos were gassed?

    Worst foreign policy blunder in living memory?

    Let’s see, Carter handing back the Panama Canal. The Iran Hostage Crisis, doing jack shit about the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, gas lines, etc…. Clinton urging Israel to give the rats of Hamas a piece of land, attack base to use against the Joos. 8 years DOING NOTHING about Osama Bin Laden. Clinton selling North Korea a nuclear reactor. Clinton letting the Chi Comms get precise technology so their nukes work better. Yeah, noticeably the Democrats massive blunders were missed, eh, Muzzy? Sheesh. At least mention both sides screwing up, to try and hind your trollish ways.

    Twit.

    Also, no one will argue Bush is far from intellectually endowed as Presidente Jorge shows by opening up the borders in a time of war and hamstringing our commanders. However, if Congress wanted to stop the war, why haven’t they done anything but some meaningless albeit symbolic votes? Could it be, that leaving now would make the Killing Fields of Cambodia look like a Cub Scout brawl? Could it be that Iraq being swallowed up by Iran would play too well into the hands of them and the other Islamists looking to take the whole Middle East and wind back the clock 1200 years? Or could be that the Democraps and RINOS just cannot muster the balls to cut off the troops funding, because those troops may eventually turn their guns on these chickenshits if pushed too far? Can you guess why or are you gonna spout off more BS?

  7. BauerPower Comment by BauerPower

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    Well, speaking of bloodsucking, mooselimb loving propagandists…. New Republics Front Line Quisling, Beauchamp The Bloghead, falsified documents in a time of war, and New Republic is up shit creek, without a paddle, and the canoe just up-fucking-ended!

    Burn in hell, bastards! Buuuuuuuuuuuurn!

  8. Unregistered Comment by mindy1

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    My question is-if all hollywood wanted to do is make a thought provoking movie, do they have to make a movie that makes us look bad? I love free speech, but who do they think makes it possible? I have such respect for our soldiers(and sailors brian) that I have refused to see any anti war movie. I just want to see the kingdom, and I am waiting to see if any of the unsung glory subjects, especially Lt Murphy get to be the character. Rumor has it lone survivor will be a movie. Can’t wait to see if it’s true, and does not change it too much.

  9. Muzzy Comment by Muzzy

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    Misha wrote:

    Alright, then. If you can come up with a set in stone, crystal clear definition of when the country is at war, what it requires for it to be at war and just how that point is reached, I congratulate you. Because you will have achieved something that no Constitutional scholar has achieved over a mere two centuries.

    I don’t think I need to do that. The wording of paragraph 9(c) clearly states: In the event of war, my enlistment in the Armed Forces continues… To demonstrate that stop loss orders are, if not entirely illegal, then at least residing in some sort of legislative limbo, I need only demonstrate that we are not legally at war at this precise moment. I don’t know what would constitute a “Crystal clear definition of when the country is at war”, but I’m pretty certain that, whatever form such a definition would take, it would contain the formal declaration of war from the U.S. Congress conspicuously absent in this conflict.

    But the alternative is worse. Unless you’re al-Qaeda, that is. Are you?

    This statement could be interpreted in a variety of ways. When you speak of “The alternative”, are you talking about the likely extension of the status quo in Iraq prior to our invasion, where the country was slowly being strangled by the Hussein dynasty? Or are you talking about the dangers of radical Islam should we decide to bring the troops home? Or is it something else? Could you clarify please?

    And FYI, I would never be a member of al-Qaeda, especially when Hizbollah offer such a competitive benefits package (’Suicidal Jihad: Satisfaction guaranteed or your autopsy’s free!’) They even offer to send someone round to pick your teeth out of the walls after you blow yourself up. And the cut of their dynamite vests is just so much snappier in a kind of ‘Queer Eye For The Infidel Guy’** kinda way.

    And you must have fallen asleep before the “do you remember what we did” line and the tears rolling down cheeks. I could be wrong, but somehow I don’t suspect they were referring to rebuilding orphanages, distributing candy or killing Hajis.

    I can see what you mean, but I don’t think that line forms a very firm basis on which to declare the film ‘Anti-troop’, as you seemed to have done. Heroes do nasty shit in the field, and I don’t need to tell you that the mental effects of witnessing and/or participating in the horrors of war don’t just evaporate overnight, no matter how righteous you are.

    I have a friend I’ve known since I was an ankle biter. He went to Iraq at the start of the war, killing four Jihadis in various fire fights during his one and only tour to date. I’ve spoken with him about this at length and no matter how many times I or anyone else tells him he did the right thing, and that each one of them would have gladly killed him given half a chance, he still feels bad about it. The proscription against murder is so deeply ingrained in our psyches that it’s possible to feel guilty even when you’ve done nothing worse than take out a few nutcase Jihadis who were probably secretly hoping to get shot anyway. It’s perfectly possible that the soldiers in this film are expressing regret at their actions while simultaneously acknowledging that their actions were morally correct. We don’t have the benefit of hearing the line in its proper context so we can’t really say for sure, and I think we should wait until the film is out before using that line to say that it’s ‘Anti-Troop’, especially in light of the taglines which strongly suggest otherwise.

    Oh yes. They’re addressing soldiers alright. Just like these swine. (Where the fuck is Kent State when we need one???) They’re telling them that it’s all pointless, that it’s all for nothing, that your leaders are wrong, that al-Qaeda is right, blah, blah, blah. Add a funny accent and a few lines about Jodies screwing their girlfriends at home and Lord Haw-Haw and the Tokyo Rose would be proud.

    I’m sorry, but that’s just a bunch of crap. You’re reading things into this trailer that simply aren’t there. At no point does the trailer even remotely suggest that al-Qaeda is right, or that “It’s all for nothing”. In fact, the trailer makes it quite clear what these soldiers were fighting for. You *are* right that the trailer adopts a somewhat hostile position towards the *leaders* of this conflict, but that’s because the leaders of this conflict (and by that I mean the politicians who initiated it) are a bunch of clueless fucking morons with potato batteries where their brains should be and who couldn’t organise a boner in a whorehouse let alone orchestrate a sophisticated multi-stage invasion and post-war pacification of a hostile population.

    All they needed was a few pickup trucks with the Stars and Bars on ‘em and it would be a perfect Hollyweird stereotype.

    Fair enough. I’ll take your word on that.

    L.C. Fanusi Khiyal wrote:

    Allow me to decode: Why Southerners? Well because there is no way that The People could possibly have a different opinion to the leftist mandarins, unless they had been Gotten Too by The Establishment (these assholes forget that they are the establishment).

    Or maybe the film concentrates on Southern characters because both the screenwriters are Southerners themselves? Kimberley Pierce, who also directs, is from Miami Florida while her writing partner Mark Richard was born in Louisiana and raised in Texas & Virginia. Maybe they’re just following that old writer’s maxim & sticking to what they know? Incidentally, Richard’s resume is every aspiring writer’s wet dream. An award winning short story writer & best selling novelist, Hemingway award recipient and writer in residence for some of America’s best universities (including the decidedly Southern University of Mississippi & Southern State U.) the guy seems like a heavyweight and shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand. I think we should reserve judgement until the film comes out.

    **Al-Jazeera subscribers only.

  10. Unregistered Pingback by Swing and a miss

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    […] the failure of Rendition Hollywood is reloading. […]

  11. Emperor Misha I Comment by Emperor Misha I

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    I don’t think I need to do that. The wording of paragraph 9(c) clearly states: “In the event of war, my enlistment in the Armed Forces continues… To demonstrate that stop loss orders are, if not entirely illegal, then at least residing in some sort of legislative limbo, I need only demonstrate that we are not legally at war at this precise moment.

    And that’s the monumental task facing you, right there.

    You see, there is no legal distinction between a “formal declaration of war” and an authorization to use military force. None. Look it up.

    And there is actually a precedent for the exact situation that you’re talking about. It’s Orlando vs Laird, in which a draftee for the Vietnam war who had been ordered to serve in Vietnam “during the war” argued, wait for it, that he wasn’t required to do so since no declaration of war, and therefore no “state of war” existed.

    He didn’t prevail before a court of law, and nor would your argument since it is, in effect, the exact same argument. The Second Circuit ruled that:

    The form which congressional authorization should take is one of policy, committed to the discretion of the Congress and outside the power and competency of the judiciary, because there are no intelligible and objectively manageable standards by which to judge such actions.

    …and, on the way to that:

    …war authorization can occur informally through “a resolution and war-implementing legislation” rather than a formal declaration of war and still satisfy the Declare War Clause.

    Not to mention that nobody (sane, that is) would ever argue that a state of war did NOT exist between the U.S. and North Viet Nam at the time, formal declaration or no.

    Also, in Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld, the court ruled that:

    …a state of war existed and Congress had acted through legislation to trigger the safeguards of law.

    So yes, Virginia, we are at war, and therefore “for the duration of the war” means exactly what it says.

    Think that those were just Republican activist judges? Think again. In 2001, Sen. Joe Biden (not a Neocon hawk by any stretch of the definition) noted that:

    Under the Constitution, there is simply no distinction … Louis Fisher(?) and others can tell you, there is no distinction between a formal declaration of war, and an authorization of use of force. There is none for Constitutional purposes. None whatsoever. And we defined in that Use of Force Act that we passed, what … against whom we were moving, and what authority was granted to the President.

    (A big thank you to George Malor at Ace of Spades, to whom I am indebted for the above).

    This statement could be interpreted in a variety of ways. When you speak of “The alternative”, are you talking about the likely extension of the status quo in Iraq prior to our invasion, where the country was slowly being strangled by the Hussein dynasty? Or are you talking about the dangers of radical Islam should we decide to bring the troops home? Or is it something else? Could you clarify please?

    Oh give me a break, Muzzy. It’s not like you just stumbled across this site yesterday after tea. You know exactly what I’m referring to.

    I can see what you mean, but I don’t think that line forms a very firm basis on which to declare the film ‘Anti-troop’, as you seemed to have done. Heroes do nasty shit in the field, and I don’t need to tell you that the mental effects of witnessing and/or participating in the horrors of war don’t just evaporate overnight, no matter how righteous you are.

    Nobody says that there isn’t. All I’m saying is that there seems to be a preponderance of that particular theme in every single cookie-cutter leftist anti-war propaganda fest to ever come out. Why would one dwell on a subject like that in a time of war? Isn’t it in the best interest of the nation to not dwell on the negatives to the exclusion of the positives? Isn’t doing so likely to demoralize the troops which, in times of war, tends to not only encourage and help the enemy, it also tends to hurt our own troops?

    There used to be a consensus opinion that yes, it is, and wartime movies reflected that opinion.

    You can argue ’till you turn blue in the face that “those are just the harsh realities of war”, nobody is disputing that fact, but it doesn’t change the fact that accentuating the negatives, particularly when you do so in a constant barrage of demoralizing mush as Hollyweird has done since it became fashionable to be an objectively pro-terrorist mouthpiece, only helps ONE side, and that side ain’t ours.

  12. Unregistered Comment by Draven32

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    So we’re ‘rejecting the Iraq war‘ at the box office?

    Maybe we’re just rejecting Hollyweird’s antiwar liberal interpretation of it, no?

  13. Sir Guido Cabrone, LC, M.o.P. Comment by Sir Guido Cabrone, LC, M.o.P.

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    Muzzy,

    And the cut of their dynamite vests is just so much snappier in a kind of ‘Queer Eye For The Infidel Guy’** kinda way.

    I’ve gotta give ya this one. That’s funny.

  14. LC HJ Caveman82952 Comment by LC HJ Caveman82952

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    It is being rejected at the box office, where the rubber meets the road. Oscars don’t mean shit, they lost their credibility, a la Nobel prize, years ago. Most of this left wing crap is simply too depressing, as witnessed by the success stories of air America and such. Most NPR I’ve heard on your tax dime sounds like it is being hosted by pre-menopausal man haters……. I don’t listen much……..it is depressing. I don’t take too well to the PMS crowd, pissing, moaning and sniveling, much preferring to solve problems than wallow in themm.

  15. LC HJ Caveman82952 Comment by LC HJ Caveman82952

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071025/NATION/110250083/1002
    Pleasant reading…..

  16. Muzzy Comment by Muzzy

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    Misha

    In re: Stop loss orders. I think I should bow to your superior knowledge of these matters. I was aware that an authorisation to use military force can be issued independently of a formal declaration of war by U.S. congress, but not that such an authorisation can provide a basis for stop loss orders, as seems to be the case.

    As for your second point that, despite this war’s numerous calamities and atrocities, abstaining from conflict would have reaped a greater whirlwind, I am still somewhat perplexed. I am choosing to interpret you as meaning that the war is having the salutory effect of stemming the Jihadist horde at the source. In other words, that the strategy of “fighting them over there so we won’t have to fight them over here” is a sensible one which will benefit us in the long term. Am I off base on this?

    As for your third point, that

    Isn’t it in the best interest of the nation to not dwell on the negatives to the exclusion of the positives? Isn’t doing so likely to demoralize the troops which, in times of war, tends to not only encourage and help the enemy, it also tends to hurt our own troops?

    Wouldn’t you agree that the logical implication of this argument is that any criticism of a war, or an administration in a time of war, is prima facie unpatriotic? I think this is a rather dangerous line of thinking. Personally, I’ve always been of the opinion that political criticism is never more necessary than during a war, any war. What do you think?

  17. Unregistered Comment by Draven32

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    In other words, that the strategy of “fighting them over there so we won’t have to fight them over here” is a sensible one which will benefit us in the long term. Am I off base on this?

    At least in my case, yes. I may be a gunnie, but I don’t want to have to carry something loaded with AP rounds when I go to the mall just in case we get attacked.

  18. LC 0311 crunchie Comment by LC 0311 crunchie

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    Wouldn’t you agree that the logical implication of this argument is that any criticism of a war, or an administration in a time of war, is prima facie unpatriotic?

    Criticism of a war in and of itself is not unpatriotic, if it’s goal is to win the war. FDR and the Marine Corps received a lot of criticism after Betio/Tarawa in ‘43. The criticism wasn’t that FDR sent the Marines to have their heads blown off for his personal amusement. It was why were the casualties so high and what needs to be done to make the next assault against a prepared beach defense less costly.

    Misha was talking about criticism to the exclusion of telling the positive. That’s what we are seeing now. Just negative criticism of the war with absolute zero reporting on our successes.

  19. Emperor Misha I Comment by Emperor Misha I

    Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method emotions::filter_text() should not be called statically in /home/misha/public_html/2007/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

    Wouldn’t you agree that the logical implication of this argument is that any criticism of a war, or an administration in a time of war, is prima facie unpatriotic? I think this is a rather dangerous line of thinking. Personally, I’ve always been of the opinion that political criticism is never more necessary than during a war, any war. What do you think?

    Adding to Crunchie’s excellent points, I very much agree with you that it’s a dangerous area to move into, because it’s one heck of a balancing act.

    On the one extreme, you can censor every single word that criticizes anything that might be construed to make the government look bad and, on the other, you can let everybody say everything they want, to the point where it is no longer necessary for the enemy to run propaganda efforts of their own because it’s already being done by ourselves.

    The trick is staying in the “sweet spot” somewhere in between, a by no means easy feat to accomplish.

    There is absolutely no denying that you cannot effectively fight a war if you don’t control the information, or “message”, to an extent. Not to the point of lying, lying is the worst possible form of propaganda since it will invariably be found out and backfire, but to the extent where you at the very least make sure that the positives are reported with at least as much emphasis as the negatives, preferably more so.

    Is this a form of “censorship?” You’re damn right it is, but that’s how you fight and win a war. Wars aren’t the same as peace, and different rules apply. You didn’t see the New York Times publishing the convoy schedules during WWII, did you? Of course not, you’d say, but in this war that same paper has already blown the lid off of more highly effective counter-terrorist operations than I can remember. That costs lives. It has cost lives already, and it will continue to cost lives. All of those lives can be laid at the doorstep of Pinch Sulzberger and his fifth column minions, and I don’t care what you or anybody else says.

    They’re responsible, period. Some may think that this is a reasonable price to pay for “freedom to publish treasonous speech”, but none of the people saying this are the ones who have been paying it. It’s always awfully easy to be idealistic when it’s somebody else paying the price.

    Now I don’t like the fact that we can’t continue to party like it’s 9/10/2001, throwing caution to the wind and letting fly with any damn thing we bloody well please. I happen to like it when society is like that, and I most certainly do not like to think about some expressions being declared off-limits temporarily, because you never know how “temporary” that’s really going to be.

    That’s reason #1,336 why wars are nasty and something you avoid for as long as you possibly can, because you simply can’t afford the kind of free-wheeling, gum-flapping nonsense that has no serious consequences in peacetime. That’s also a reason why you need to win wars as quickly as possible, so you can roll back those temporary measures as soon as possible and before they become “business as usual”, because by then they’re damn near impossible to get rid of.

    And the only way to win a war quickly, but that’s a subject for another time, is to hit the enemy with everything you have, all the time, anywhere you can find him, no restrictions, no holds barred, 24/7 and keep hitting him until the corpse stops twitching.

    THEN you declare victory and go home.