Clearly, Marines don’t receive much education. “the opportunities to kill these fuckers are rapidly coming to an end.”
Dumb ass.

I like how he evokes God and talks about gleeful murder in same sentence.

Is anyone really surprised. It seems to me there are only two types of Marine, i.e., after they’ve seen combat: the hyper-aggressive type(shown here), or the repentant type (many during Vietnam, know a few, in fact). Is it sad? Yes, certainly, but it’s reality. It doesn’t matter how long the war, this is the price—you’re going to lose some, both to insanity/depravity and to casualties. RS posts that letter as if this were a new development, only it’s not new. It’s millennia old.

Matt,

You once pointed out in regard to the soldiers in Iraq, that you were impressed at their steadfastness and loyalty in the face of an ambiguous mission, and even noted that we’d all be in more trouble should they ever not feel that way. Now, you’re troubled by this soldier’s professed love of killing, and blame the military-industrial complex. War is War.

you can be a warrior without being a mass murdering psychopath. Killing for killings sake is Murder and we should really be worried about the ones that can’t turn off the murdering instinct once they return. Good thing they charged those guys that killed that 14yo girl and her family. Otherwise, since he was already discharged, he would have become the next serial killer.

just read your piece Matt, somewhat somber considering the hillarity of some of your previous stories, though I agree with you completely, I have to add that the lack of a proper social education is also a contributor to this mindset. Too many kids losing their innate inhibition to killing by playing video games that teach nothing more than killing and strategies to kill more efficiently.

this is the nature of war, since the beginning of time…but it strikes me of the stories that came out of vietnam, most of which proved to be false (save for My Lie), or at best, greatly over dramatized…it doesnt mean that it doesnt happen, but i dont think its endemic.

in any case, we sent our soldiers over there for one reason–to kill. too many people seem to be under the delusion that we keep a professional army simply to plant flowers and feed people in poor country. and in war, there are always casualties, innocents killed. its terrible, but it happens

that said, im willing to give the soldiers the benefit of doubt simply because of what they have to deal with every day, and, keep in mind, they know and see stuff that we dont…i think anyone would start feeling like that pilot if you saw your comrades being blown to bits daily

What are we fighting for? What do we hope to gain? What is the point?

If this is a war about oil, then how can you possibly excuse the massive was of oil that is the war machine?

I think we are just fighting for the sake of fighting. Bush and Cheney wanted to be historic figures. They succeeded. I hope they are proud of their legacy.

I have noticed that when you send 18 year olds to war they either get into killing or die. Most of the Nam vets I know were out of sorts when they got home and missed the jungle and the blood. My next door neighbor did three tours and they wouldn’t send him back because he was “mentally disturbed” after killing people for years. No shit… Now I have a cousin who is an Army Ranger and he has two blood stained turbans hanging from his fireplace mantle. “Confirmed kills” is all he would say about it! And my wife thinks I’m crazy because of my antlers on the wall.

Pubicus:

Not even in the fuckin ballpark, buddy. When Saddam Hussein’s regime fell, that ended it as far as the “kill ‘em all” justification went. This has been officially labeled a “nation-building” exercise. So “kill ‘em all” doesn’t fly; I don’t support Bush, I’m just extrapolating logically from what he said. You can’t support him and ignore how this shitpile war’s been labeled.

“War is Hell”…

Ask any long-time military officer who has served in more than a Few…

To go to war with the Goal to enrich the Oil Industry, Corrupt Politicians, Halliburton, Military Industrial Complex, is Satanic and Obscene…

Three thousand troops(PLUS) have given their lives and Afghanistan should have been the Country we Focused on and the terrorists we Finished…(Not much oil there).

Ask a Pearl Harbor veteren, a Vietnam veteren, a Korean War veteren and none of the Good Ones will or would call this Bush/Republican Mess worthy of our Country or its reputation….

Ask the people who are and have Fought in Real Battles(Not Cheney or Bush or the imbecilic Rumsfeld)…

These traitors(Bush and pals) are not asking “What they can do for their country(never did)but, What their country can do to $enrich them$….

The troops are not getting the supplies, medical help, emotional help or, educational help to meet their commitment to serve…

“War is Hell”…

Especially, when run by “Cut and Run” politicians who never had a clue…

Ask any long-time military officer who has served in more than a Few…(Talking about family).

To go to war with the Goal to enrich the Oil Industry, Corrupt Politicians, Halliburton, Military Industrial Complex, is Satanic and Obscene…

Three thousand troops(PLUS) have given their lives and Afghanistan should have been the Country we Focused on and the terrorists we Finished…(Not much oil there).

Ask a Pearl Harbor veteren, a Vietnam veteren, a Korean War veteren) None of the Good Ones will or would call this Bush/Republican Mess worthy of our Country or its reputation….

Ask the people who are and have Fought in Real Battles(Not Cheney or Bush or the imbecilic Rumsfeld)…

These traitors(Bush and pals) are not asking “What they can do for their country(never did)but, What their country can do to $enrich them$….

The troops are not getting the supplies, medical help, emotional help or, educational help to meet their commitment to serve…

(And M, you are full of it-censorship, anyone?)

Keep up the good work, Matt Taibbi. I agree with your comment about the existence of detached yet militaristic mindset that is rampant in this country. Our “leaders” must end this war, but only the American public can force them to do so. Vote peace!

War is War is not a sufficient excuse.

This reminds me of Jack Nicholson’s speech at the end of A few good men “You want me on that wall, you need me on that wall”, etc.

And to Shakespeare’s Caesar saying, “Cry ‘Havoc’ and let slip the dogs of war”, too.

Matt, are you really trying to imply that the majority of Marines or US soldiers are like that? The soldiers should want to kill terrorists, it’s their job. But, in no way does this bloodthristy pilot represent the opinions of the average solider. Yes, they should (and do) want to kill “these fuckers” (terrorists), but the vast majority of US soldiers fight responsibly and for love of their country. To say otherwise is irresponsible.

We should realize that this Marine is basically the face of the US to the vast majority of the worlds citizens, and rightfully so.

No, not rightfully so. America does more good things for the world than any other country because the majority of Americans are good people. We are hated because most of the world only sees one side of the story (does anyone still think that the media can’t drastically effect viewpoints?).

A few points;

1) The kind of aggressive mentality depicted in this email isn’t a product of our culture; it’s a product of human nature. Aggression, brutality, even cruelty are part of our natural make up as human beings. One of the paramount horrors of war is that people who in other settings would be kind and gentle, will in war commit horrible acts. Blaming our nation’s culture for this natural human tendency is both erroneous and revealing of a bias against our nation. Moreover your comments reveal a naive sense of superiority, as if you would under similar circumstances would be immune to these darker aspects of human nature. Rest assured you have no such immunity, these violent impulses are as much a part of your nature as they are of mine or this fighter pilots.

2) The reason Dennis Kucinich will never win a presidential election in this country is not because the military-industrial complex has warped our culture. It is because he lacks gravitas and has devolved into a caricature of himself.

3) Pacifism is not dismissed and derided in our culture because of the influence of the military-industrial complex. It is dismissed because it an irrational and naive philosophy for any nation -state interested in its survival to pursue. The world is full of aggressive people, we may bemoan this reality but we must not deny it. Turning the other cheek may sound good and noble in theory, but in practice it is simply a good way to get smacked. My own life experience has taught me trying to walk away from a fight will only get you hit in the back.

You’re column was interesting and I enjoyed reading it. While I agree with you that the military-industrial complex has a profound negative influence on our nations political classes and policy making apparatus, I cannot support your apparent contention that it is the author of all evils in our society. You give too little, or perhaps too much, credit to human nature.

It’s an all-volunteer army, so you get only two types of people enlisting: (1) the most selfless, patriotic people in America, and (2) the sickest bastards in America. NORMAL people do not join the army.

I doubt Iraq did anything major to this kid; he just falls into the latter category of enlisters.

As long as Washington stays in the hands of the elected elite, we will have war. And until we stand up and demand the changes in energy, health care, and social issues, we are doomed to be manipulated by the military-industrial complex, pharma, insurance, and oil.

Our children will kill or be killed for nothing more than greed.

Theodore makes a point or two. Though I wouldn’t go so far as to say humans are by nature malicious and violent, that’s just a generalization.

I’m from the Mid West, and I know the sort of people who enlist. There are a few patriots, but the majority of Marines coming from my region are racist, hyper-aggressive, and largely(if not entirely) stupid. They join to wield an assault rifle, and, unfortunately, the rifle wielders are the ones that represent us to the world. The people, some even friends, who enlist to join in the actual rebuilding are usually doing so in lieu of a formal education. These people join the basic branches to perform specialized tasks that don’t include killing.

To refer to this soldier as a “scumbag” is offensive to the highest degree. Whether you like it or not, this soldier is putting his ass on the line for the rest of us to sit in the comfort of our homes or offices and type meaningless rubbish on this blog.
For a layman to make critical statements about this soldier’s sentiments while having no idea what he has seen or been through is foolhardy for sure. He is stating that he enjoys killing an enemy that will do anything to kill him. I don’t find that position that radical. Especially given that over time and repeated occurences, one most certainly could develop a blood lust for killing the enemy. That is human nature, not the result of a corrupted culture.
So while some of you choose to side with the “blame America first” crowd please remmeber that soldiers like this one are willing to die for your right to do so.

My stepfather was a USAF fighter pilot who flew combat in WWII, the Korean War, and served as a logistics officer in Viet Nam in 1968. I grew up on military bases, and knew a lot of fighter pilots and other military officers and their families. None of them ever talked like that, nor struck me as a bloodthirsty killer as the letter above indicates. They all did their jobs, and none of them loved the killing. The Marine pilot is a symptom of our times, and the decline of our nation into a brutal empire. Some of those who hate us may be irrational and merely passionate, but many of them do for good reason. It’s only a matter of time before the blowback hits us again, and that will be the death of our democracy.

“To refer to this soldier as a “scumbag” is offensive to the highest degree. Whether you like it or not, this soldier is putting his ass on the line for the rest of us to sit in the comfort of our homes or offices and type meaningless rubbish on this blog.”

——————– —–

Wrong. This soldier is putting his life on the line to create more Al Quaeda and Sunni terrorists. The Iraq war has proven this.

And the cons on this blog need to contend with the fact that our country is now funding Sunni extremist groups affiliated with Al Quaeda. Where is your “patriotism” now? Where is your outrage that this administration is funding the very people who attack the U.S. in Iraq each day?

You have lost all legs on which to argue. You are now lost. I have known it for 6 years, now there is no way you can deny it.

“… an almost irresistible urge to bomb villages.”
- Margaret Minsky

Matt’s article reminds me of something I heard years ago at the national computer graphics seminar known as Siggraph.

In the late 1980s and early 1990s virtual reality was a hot topic. Scientists were modeling wind behavior, matching molecules and playing virtual tennis on helmet-mounted displays and in rooms which had huge TVs as walls. “Immersive virtual reality.”

The speaker was Margaret Minsky, daughter of Marvin Minsky, MIT’s Artificial Intelligence pioneer. Wikipedia tells me that in the 1960s the father patented “the first head-mounted graphical display.”

Anyway, daughter Margaret was doing research in virtual reality at MIT two decades ago. Her research had a different approach. Rather than trying to immerse the user in an unreal environment using data gloves and head-mounted displays, she and her associate had built a teddy-bear like doll that girls could play with.

The act of dressing the doll was linked to a computer program that displayed an animated version of the doll that had the same clothing.

If you think about it this is actually an interesting approach to the “touchable” user interface.

My point of reference however is to Matt’s line in the article, “how a society whose economy is based on high-tech defense spending will first tend to gravitate inexorably toward high-tech defense solutions to policy problems, and then over time will raise whole generations instilled with an implicit belief in and enthusiasm for such lunacies as the ’surgical strike.’”

To my mind this is matched perfectly by Margaret Minsky’s presentation where she says (paraphrased), “One reason we chose this avenue was that although we had visited and tested the best of the military’s state-of-the-art helicopter and jet fighter simulators, we discovered an important fact: While using these devices the only response you had was an almost irresistible urge to bomb villages.”

When all you have is a hammer … everything looks like a nail.

US savagery: It’s the Iraqi patriots’ land; we’re the Redcoats there.

Unless people take a more active role in letting their politicians know how outraged and Finished with Bush’s trumped-up oil war, you are, it will continue until we have no troops left to send(And we really are about there).

And, let’s not Condone this “Fiasco” by making benign statements, “That war is always corrpt”.

This “Pre-emptive Strike” that Cheney/Bush and fellow money-makers pushed us into, will be one of the Worst Messes to go down in the history books(It is worse than Vietnam)…

If the Republican Fascist Control on the Government now, allows History books to include the Real Facts about Bush’s War in Iraq….

Maybe they will “Disappear like
Bush’s *military records*(Wink) or, be claimed as “Security Secrets” like the Enron notes(plot for war, 9/11, Enron controlling Energy policies, oil company involvement…

Censorship is a dangerous venture…

I fear Matt that in twenty years your resemblance to Richard Cohen may be far closers than your worst nightmares would portend. Sometimes you seem to get it and then all of a sudden odd liberal tendencies seep out.

For instance, you are making far too copious use of ‘we’ to describe the comings, goings, hopes and dreams of that very small number of wealthy elites who, unlike the rest of us, actually influence things. In fact, for all its power, the military-indusrial complex has not coerced average Americans from basic decency: hence the need to tell huge lies and monger fear any time a new foreign adventure is required.

A candidacy like Kucinich’s fails in America, not because of any widespread cultural deficiency, but because the folks who fund campaigns have no interest in funding him. Their pals in media have no interest in covering him. If by some odd combination of circumstances his campaign caught fire regardless, there would be no limit to the ruthlessness with which members of his own party would destroy him.

Though I am sure he intends otherwise, Kucinich objectively functions as cover for a thoroughly corrupt Democratic Party and fosters the illusion that there is room for dissent under its big tent. Then after he has been soundly defeated in the primary he’ll march his supporters lemming-like over the Hillary or Obama cliff just as he did on behalf of Kerry not long ago.

As for the moral worthiness of soldiers: the line where you say you are wary of all those stories about soldiers and then enumerate several well documented incidents of atrocity reads like satire. I have known rich people and poor people. Educated folk and uneducated folk. One thing I’ve learned: moral choices are possible for everyone. I think you would agree that soldier’s youth or limited options do not give him a license to club you on the head and steal your car. By extension it doesn’t excuse voluntary participation in the destruction of a defenseless country. There is nothing to being a soldier in Iraq apart from the killing. Kind of obvious, really.

Word 1 | 3/3/2007, 1:08 am EST

“This soldier is putting his life on the line to create more Al Quaeda and Sunni terrorists. The Iraq war has proven this.”

-

That’s a flawed agrument. The fact that additional terrorists have been created was an unintended effect of the war. It is not a soldier’s fault that more terrorists are killing innocent people, it is the fault of the terrorist. Just like 9/11 wasn’t Clinton or Bush’s “fault”, it was the terrorists who killed innocent people. Our soldiers in Iraq are doing their jobs under difficult conditions that have risen from a variety of sources. I will take our soliders over any other country’s fighters in a heartbeat.

“It is not a soldier’s fault that more terrorists are killing innocent people, it is the fault of the terrorist.”

Go back and read the post. I never said the increase in terrorists was a soldier’s fault. I was responding to some idiot who said the soldier was risking his life for our safety. The fact that there are more terrorists as a result from the invasion proves that the soldier’s presence there is making us less safe, not more. The people at fault are the ones who sent him there.

A War based on lies will never accomplish what the initiators intended…

It is disgusting how many innocent lives were lost and, what profits are flowing into what political and Corporate pockets…

The terrorists are there because America started a war for political and corporate power-oil flowing into the greedy hands of Cheney and his sub-human fellow criminals- to stop the Occupation of American Troops and Prevent the Oil companies from taking Control of their Oil….

Now, Cons, pretty up this picture for us…Our Troops dying, innocent Iraqi civilians dying-so the Washington Republican Elite Can Continue on thier Greed & Power Trip And Control Everyone’s Oil-(Rove channeling Hitler, anyone(?)

Bush and his Organ-grinder are intent on duplicating the whole mess, again, with Iran…

China gave them a preview of things to come, should they try it…

The exposure of what Bush and his Party have tax-cut into oblivion, has been a disaster for our Troops and, allows our Country and the World to View just how “They(Bush/Cheney & the Republicans) Support the Troops”.

Check-out Walter Reed “outpatient” or any other military hospital, find out what benefits have been slashed for soldiers and veterens since Bumbles Bush, depleted American Votes…To “Win”(Wink, Wink)…

How many military bases closed since George came to Washington? How badly are the soldiers lacking in equipment/helmets/bathing facilities/leaves/food….(?)

Tell us, Cons, how much You support the Troops-enjoying those Bush Perpetual Tax Cuts????$$$$$$$$$$$$$$=You—- ————-=Troops—-000000 000000And, You say you “Support the Troops”???????
Hey, Cheer Up, Cheney may drop by to do a ten minute photo-op any day now or Bush may make his Grand Entrance on the, “Spirit of Strom Thurmond”, too to “Cheer the Troops!”…How Spethelll!

While my own views seem to align about 99% with Taibbi’s, I’m surprised no one has taken him to task for referencing that inflammatory video. Yes, it’s possible that this was cold-blooded, indiscriminate killing. On the other hand, what context are we missing here? Were the pilots aware of insurgent activity in the area? Were there troops on the ground at risk from insurgents? What discussion occurred before the tape rolled? Why was this crowd moving with purpose down an otherwise deserted street? For that matter, how do we know the audio is legit? Taibbi needs to be vigilant about war propaganda coming from the right AND the left.

Word 1, so what is your solution to solving the problem of terrorism and the Middle East? If trying to kill the terrorists on their soil is not the right play, what do we do? The terrorist agenda is an entire world that follows Islam, so how do we combat that?

“Word 1, so what is your solution to solving the problem of terrorism and the Middle East? If trying to kill the terrorists on their soil is not the right play, what do we do? The terrorist agenda is an entire world that follows Islam, so how do we combat that?”

Somewhere,

Well, in 2002 I would have said we should go after Osama and not stop until the fucker’s head was blown off.

Today it’s very murkey. (We should still kill Osama). Obviously combating terrorism means defining exactly who is a terrorist. Al Qaeda certainly qualifies along with Hezbollah and to a lesser extent, Hamas. The former is a rouge network with no real political power but the latter two present problems for us because they are seen as more than terrorists by the greater Islamic world. The solution for Al Qaeda would be to capture and kill them. For Hezbollah and Hamas it would be to marginalize thier violent wings and separate them from thier political ones. This can be done very easily if our country wanted to, through manipulation of world financial resources, manipulation of oil prices (Cheney already did this), sanctions, bribery, clandestine warfare, assasinations that pit violent terrorists against themselves, dissemenating propaganda through radio, t.v., etc. The key is to do it without them knowing it was you; the worst thing you can do is give the greater muslim population a reason to sympathize with terrorists because you do nothing but create more of them. Bombing a sovereign nation or invading one strengthens extremist groups because it proves thier legitimacy in the eyes of their public. Hezbollah’s empowerment after Israel bombed Lebanon is a great example of this.

This kind of warfare has been national policy for 50 years and the C.I.A. was at its forefront. I woundn’t defend the C.I.A. or all the wars they fought or all the reasons they fought them but those kinds of tactics are excellent for fighting terrorism.

As far as Iran goes, that country will throw its nutty president out soon. Iran has expressed interest in joining the world community and siding with the U.S. before (they aided us in the Afghanistan war) and there is no reason the leaders of that country would attack us. Contrary to what you may think, the Iranian mullahs don’t want to establish global Islamic rule, they just want to survive. We can take advantage of this and spin that country into something resembling a peaceful nation. If we attack them we risk China dragging us into a recession (China gets most of its oil from Iran).

We don’t have great cards on this but there is a way to get out of this shit alive. Attacking Iran is not it.

Yup.

Taibbi’s observation about how we are a military/industrial culture so will seek out military/industrial projects to ‘keep busy’ is one of the least unstated reasons we went to war.

I’ve been saying this myself for awhile, besides all the other crappy reasons, one more reason we invaded Iraq is that, well, we have this giant military that hadn’t been seriously deployed in over a decade, it was time for them to do something.

It’s not the only reason, but it’s a big one.

people should be in war for the love of your country not the love of killing. but when there a war has nothing to do with the home country are people really suprised that this mans in t for the kill

word 1– the point you make is an interesting one, but i think you observation is a little bit off

the mullahs are anti-US, make no mistake about it, but your right in that they wont attack the US, at least not in the open (after all, thats why they created Hezbollah and Hamas, to do their dirty work for them)

they’re smart enough to know that we could probably destroy Iran via force if they tried anything, and thus they’re content to rattle the saber to

1. intimidate and provoke us, because by provoking the US into a threatening statement it adds to their cause of muslim liberation/domination, fullfilling our title of “the Great Satan” in the middle east

2. to keep their own people in line. the mullahs want nuclear weapons to keep themselves in power, and to make their regime look unstoppable

but to me, all of this posturing from the iranian govt seems to be a regime that seems to be running out of gas–the irainian people are getting fed up with an incompetent backwards leader, and if the mullahs stop looking tough or coercing their people with violence, Iran may have another revolution

Why do Dems/libs want America to lose in Iraq/afghanistan? After all, what does Al-Qaeda and Liberals have in common? Both want the U.S out of the middle east and both want Bush to fail.If you want an example of a true failure in the middle east, look at Jimmy Carter the Pacifist. Bush hit these muslim fascist back after we were attacked. Remember that muslim extremist didnt just kill innocent Americans starting on 9-11. As a frequent traveler to the middle east i learned and saw first hand how these extremist want to kill ALL americans. Liberal,republican,democrat, christian, and athiest alike. Please travel to some of these places there and witness for yourself like i did. So do you want the U.S to lose in Iraq?

It never ceases to amaze me how human beings descend into fear and prejudice to protect their own self-interest. So many Americans don’t ever bother to question what words such as “terrorist” actually mean.

Terrorists are people who resort to a particular set of tactics to attack their enemy. You can never win a “War against Terror” – terror is a tactic that will always be used in warfare, whether by civilian combatants or uniformed military.

“Terrorists” are people – just like you. If you read Osama Bin Laden’s justification for warring on the USA, you will find that he was spurred by watching US warships shelling civilians in Lebanon, killing men, women and children.

And you think that by killing thousands more men, women and children in Iraq (or wherever else your fascist government decrees), that you are solving the problem? Wake up, America.

Tabibbi strikes to the heart of the problem. The US economy is based on war and oppression. Until you defeat your own military-industrial complex, there will be unending war and unending terror across this world. Amerika = enemy of the planet.

word

Jed,

“These ‘terrorists’ are merely ununiformed wings of the arab countries militaries.”

I wouldn’t be too sure of that. In the case of the Saudis members of the royal family have repeatedly said their backing of extremist Sunni militants is strategic, volatile-because of the instability they cause- and last resort (not that I’m backing the Saudi royal family or their medieval style of government). But militant groups as they evolve cannot neatly be defined as arms of states which may have funded them in years past or may side with them when convenient. Under such a definition, Osama Bin Laden is an un-uniformed employee of the CIA because we bankrolled him during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, never mind that Osama broke with us long ago and flew a couple of planes into the world trade center. Ditto our support of extremist Sunni terror groups affiliated with Al Qaeda now; last year they were our enemies this year they’re our friends. (I still find the fact that Bush is supporting Al Qaeda affiliated groups to be treason but hell, apparently people find Anna Nicole Smith more important…were it Bill Clinton who was funding Sunni extremists then shit, I’d bet t.v. would be making us feel guilty about it until we died).

The chief problem with religious extremists is that they follow extreme religious doctrine, not Saudi, U.S. or Israeli doctrine. In the case of the Saudis, the royal family cannot count on extremists to blow up an oil pipeline simply to make the royal family rich because religious extremists don’t give three fucks how much money is in the pocket of the royal family. Much of the time, they view royals as inconsistent Muslims and want to install a more pure version.

To bring the analogy full circle-which may have been what you intended albeit not in this manner-Republicans won’t be able to control religious conservatives’ drive for monetary aid for the poor, care for the sick, and other programs that run in the face of the essential republican reason to exist: the domination of the poor by the rich. Extremist religious groups in America run the remote but possible danger of acting just as violently as Islamic terrorists.

What’s the difference? If you can get past the WWF instinct to scream “Christians are better than Muslims or Jews,” you’re halfway there. To solve the problem of terrorism you need to ask “what makes a terrorist? How does one become a terrorist?”

I’ve got views that would fill a book about this but the important thing is having a national dialogue about it. Simply dropping expensive, taxpayer-bought bombs on the “terrorists” hasn’t worked. What needs to happen is for there to be a concrete definition of a terrorist, and after that, a dialogue on how historically, economically, culturally, countries without a dangerous extremist bent differ from countries with a dangerous extremist bent (essentially, what makes a country a good breeding ground for terrorists?) Funny thing is that after Bush, the U.S. would be pretty high up there with the extremists.

I guess in a way you are right. They are rogue elements for a reason. By now, the owners have lost control of their rottweilers to a certain degree, but what drives these guys is the funding and the promise of the power to control the money the populace generates.
Ultimately, it is about power and money. They may start with a noble ideal or a desire to help their bretheren, but in the end the leaders are merely after power and wealth.
This thing cannot ever be solved militarily, each bomb that falls and kills an arab springs forth brothers, children, cousins etc. willing to kill themselves and others to avenge the death. The mindset these people have is very different than the west, the americas, europe or anyone else in the world. They’ve been getting manipulated for decades and by now it is very easy to set them off with just a few images on al-jazeera. Taking away their source of kids willing to kill themselves and others for a few dollars to feed their families and the ‘terrorism’ diminishes greatly, as their leaders are not willing to strap on a bomb belt as they send their children to do. In other words, bring prosperity to the downtrodden and show that america is that country that they dream about coming to their rescue instead of the greedy, selfish, abusive bully they are shown in their media.

“In other words, bring prosperity to the downtrodden and show that america is that country that they dream about coming to their rescue instead of the greedy, selfish, abusive bully they are shown in their media.”

I agree completely, what I was trying to suggest was a way to divide extremests from moderates; to make extremism unattractive. I believe we have the leverage and resources to do this: to steer the governments in the middle east towards moderation rather than oppression. We just have to make that the source of the billions of dollars we spend, rather than throwing it all away on high tech systems as a favor to the defense industry.

“Whether you like it or not, this soldier is putting his ass on the line for the rest of us to sit in the comfort of our homes or offices and type meaningless rubbish on this blog.”

Wrong. The soldiers in Iraq are doing NOTHING for me, because Iraq was never a threat to me (or anyone else in the U.S.). The only people those soldiers are serving are the members of BushCo.

The problem confronting the world is the greed, arrogance, brutality and ruthlessness of the United States. There are no “terrorists” – there are only people who use violence against others to further their political or ideological ends.

“Terror” is a tactic of war – as in the “fear and awe” that the US bombardment of Baghdad was supposed to create. The greed and selfishness of the USA is destroying the planet – from global warming to wars of aggression across the world. The 9/11 attacks would never have happened, had it not been for US imperialism.

In your arrogance you Americans assume that other peoples of the world want to be like you. You are dead wrong; pity you can’t see that, and greater pity that you can’t see how the actions of your country are feeding anti-American sentiment around the globe.

To call Cheney a “bloodless,vicious,cocksucker” insults all shameless,vicious cocksuckers.
Cheney is in fact a walking douchebag,a sub-human, muddling mix of vinegar and very,very dirty water….

The only “Shock and Awe” that we have experienced is the long endless war, the shock of losing over three thousand troops, the shock of four-hundred billion the U.S. has spent, the shock of Halliburton and other corrupt “corporations” fleecing America and Iraq, the shock of the Bush administration profiteering off the war(should be illegal), the shock of the lies told to get us into this quagmire and, the awe of the valiant troops who have endured personal, physical, family break-ups, lack of concern for their equipment by the administration and, the Non-planning for the possibilities of terrorist attacks, and, what would happen to the various factions if Hussein was Removed…

Awe, at how anyone would believe Bush(his zip military “experience”) and his inability to command anything but his dog…

Where is the “Awe” but “ah, shucks, why did we buy anything this sucker says”?

And Iran is his and Cheney’s next intended target-are we dumb enough and powerless enough to let these baboons get us into deeper shit?

Surely you can think of something a bit more mature to call Cheney than a “bloodless, viscious cocksucker”! That he is a prime and the primary manipulator is obvious. That he has ulterior motives is obvious. That he is a cock-sucker is not obvious, unless you have personal and inside knowledge. Using common epithets only minimizes the force of your argument. Please, your points are so strong, be more forceful and mature in making them.

Solar, you refuse to consider–or pretend not to notice–the very thick line between deliberately targeting civilians and accidentally killing them. Intellectually honest as I am, I will acknowledge Al-Qaeda’s attack on the Pentagon as a legitimate “tactic of war,” as you so eloquently put it–the place IS the headquarters for our military, after all.

But flying planes into a non-military office building with thousands of workers in it–or driving a car bomb into an outdoor market with hundreds of shoppers at it–or blowing oneself up at a university, killing dozens of students on their way to classes–these are not legitimate tactics of a military organization, nor the actions of a sensible or rational mind. These are actions of depraved lunatics who do not deserve to share the same planet as us.

You say the actions of “us Americans” are “feeding anti-American sentiment around the globe,” Solar? How about the actions of the terrorists–and yes, that is what I call them, perjoratively and without the dignifying moniker of “people.” How much sympathy do you think they are attracting to their cause with their “tactics?” How many thousands of men, women, and children have THEY intentionally killed in Iraq–just to make America, the so-called “enemy of the planet,” look bad? How many more will they kill, and how long will you continue justifying it as a way to counter US “imperialism?”

There are many in this country that assume the rest of the world wants to “be like us,” as you said. I can’t speak for them, but I can speak for decent human beings worldwide who want no part of what the animals who INTENTIONALLY target civilians want. Until they shift wholly to legitimate military tactics, and until they stop getting moral support for attacks against civilians who have nothing to do with their so-called “resistance,” you will see “arrogant” folk like me carrying the political day every time, both in American and worldwide.

And if you even come close to believing aforementioned terrorist acts to be legitimate because they a.) are aimed at “symbols” of the American military/industrial complex, or b.) are aimed at populations that were empowered by the invasion of Iraq (as some bloggers on this post do) then I can’t bring myself to even feel sympathy for you.

Matt Taibbi, I can only wish for a mind like yours. Your article in Road Rage “DICK HAS A TOUGH WEEK” was so on the money, you should be THE EDITOR ! “Cheney is still the same bloodless, vicious COCKSUCKER hes been all along.” is without a doubt the best description of this so-called “man” I’ve heard yet and “his counterpart, the president is a sniveling EGOMANIAC trapped for all eternity in some unseemly infantile phase of personality development” is a perfect description of our present “leader” that I can’t get over still how the Electoral Vote casters made him president TWICE! (not the voters, remember.) So if ANYONE EVER blames the voters for this 8 year fiasco they will be struck dead by lightning. The People of this GREAT COUNTRY OF OURS DID NOT elect these men. The idiots in the electoral college firmly placed these two boneheads in the highest post in the world. What will have to take place to prevent this from EVER happening again? Keep up the GREAT work, Matt. I’ll keep reading your column as long as you keep telling it like it is.

And could someone PLEASE tell me what, if anything, Bareass Obama has done that makes him capable of leading The United States? Granted, he WOULD probably be as good as the idiot we have doing it now.

We met Franklin “Chuck” Spinney at a beach picnic on a deserted island in the Bahamas. I wish I’d got to know him better. I have no comment about the war, but this HUGE military-industrial- complex has got to stop. Get a DVD or VHS of “Why We Fight”, watch it and take your blood pressure medicine.

Please don’t fall for the BS this guy is saying. I’m in the military and know for a fact that brain washed fools like this guy, are usually the ones who cause a lot of the non-enemy causualties. Going off shooting at anything that moves, or one of his own buddies in the back because…HE’S SCARED AS HELL. And please don’t write and say other wise, I’ve been to Iraq, if that’s the good life for him he needs to keep his ass over ther. He’ll probably come back and rob a 7-eleven. You guys better watch that guy, in my 10 years in, I’ve yet to meet a marine who talks like that.