Dec
15
2014
2

Congratulations, antiwar movement.

You people managed to move the needle on American attitudes towards CIA interrogations.

Following the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report on CIA interrogation practices in the period following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, 51% of the public says they think the CIA methods were justified, compared with just 29% who say they were not justified; 20% do not express an opinion.

The new national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Dec. 11-14 among 1,001 adults, finds that amid competing claims over the effectiveness of CIA interrogation methods, 56% believe they provided intelligence that helped prevent terrorist attacks, while just half as many (28%) say they did not provide this type of intelligence.

…admittedly, it was in the opposite direction than intended by the antiwar movement, but one has to get used to that sort of thing. It would almost be funny, except that there’s a definite undercurrent of rumor out there that suggests that things have been getting steadily worse since 2009; the lack of oversight, both internal and external, may be letting certain situations fester. Which is I guess what happens when the opposition to a war is as nakedly partisan as was the Left’s oppositions to the GWOT; once the President changes, the opposition goes away.

This can be problematical.

Moe Lane

Sep
24
2014
4

Fools, Dupes, and Knaves: a quick primer on the modern antiwar movement.

I plan to be using these categories quite often in the next few months – or years! – so I think that I should define my terms, here.  It is vitally important that, when you are showing your disapproval for someone, that you be as precise as you can be about why you disapprove.  After all, it would never do to let a Knave skate by on an improper Dupe designation, or have a Dupe be mistaken for a Fool.  Also, one other note: ‘antiwar movement’ here is defined as being the people who actively march, support, and/or attempt to change public opinion on our current foreign and political policies.  Your Aunt Peggy who doesn’t like it when we send troops abroad to places where they’re getting shot at*, and who happens to say so at Thanksgiving dinner, is neither a Fool, a Dupe, nor a Knave.  Unless she’s giving money to Code Pink, or something.  In which case, I’m sorry to hear that.

Anyway, the designations: (more…)

Aug
09
2014
2

Quote of the Day, The Wrong Two Dirty Little Words Being Conjured For The Antiwar Left edition.

The Hill:

The president’s expansion of the U.S. military mission in Iraq is conjuring up two dirty little words for anti-war Democrats: Mission creep.

The actual “two dirty little words” that should be conjured for antiwar Democrats? Shut up. No, not from me*: from President Obama. The antiwar movement still apparently has this ridiculous delusion that their relationship with the mainstream Democratic party is on the usual patron/client model.  Which is to say: Establishment Democrats get the antiwar movement’s monetary and electoral support, and in exchange they give the antiwar movement things.  That’s theoretical, of course: the reality is that the ‘relationship’ is more like You will attack my enemies, curs, or I will whip you.  Always has been, before Barack Obama made the colossal mistake of maybe kinda trying to treat the antiwar movement like they were made up of people who were really real. (more…)

Aug
08
2014
2

Tweet of the Day, This Is NOT A Recent Photo edition.

Although it might as well be, given that the antiwar Left is determined to have a honking case of amnesia on the subject.

Via

Well, it is.

May
10
2014
15

Of COURSE Ed Snowden’s heist was an espionage operation.

This should surprise nobody:

Edward Snowden‘s massive misappropriations of classified documents from the inner sanctum of U.S. intelligence is mainly presented by the media as a whistleblowing story. In this narrative—designed by Mr. Snowden himself—he is portrayed as a disgruntled contractor for the National Security Agency, acting alone, who heroically exposed the evils of government surveillance beginning in 2013.

The other way of looking at it—based on the number and nature of documents Mr. Snowden took, and the dates when they were taken—is that only a handful of the secrets had anything to do with domestic surveillance by the government and most were of primary value to an espionage operation.

(more…)

Aug
28
2013
4

I would like to thank the #antiwar movement for tacitly admitting that it was all a lie.

Their quote-unquote ‘moral stance,’ that is. I mean, I knew – like all decent people did – that the antiwar movement of the Bush years was comprised of fools, dupes, and knaves; but watching them now slink away from our looming Syrian war like this just pretty much confirms that every sneer, every insult, and every drop of contempt that I’ve ever dumped on them was completely and totally justified. And I don’t even know if the aforementioned Syrian war is the best idea, or even the least worst. But I do know what the antiwar movement’s opinion should be.

And so do they.

Moe Lane

PS: Hey, Gitmo’s still open!

PPS: If you won’t respect yourself, don’t expect me to respect you, either.

Feb
18
2013
1

Nancy Pelosi loathes the antiwar movement even more than I do!

That’s the only possible explanation for her making this statement.

[House MINORITY Leader Nancy] Pelosi appeared conflicted over whether it was acceptable for the administration to simply disappear American citizens, a term that had previously been used as a verb only outside the United States.

“It depends on the situation,” she said. “Maybe it depends on the timing, because that’s right — it’s all about timing, imminence. What is it that could be in jeopardy if people know that happened at this time? I just don’t know.”

Oh, she knows.  She totally knows.  But there’s a limit to Nancy Pelosi’s sadism, after all.  Or at least Pelosi understands that the antiwar movement will be useful to the Democrats again once the GOP wins the White House.  Even a whipped dog can serve its master. (more…)

Feb
08
2013
3

Fools, Dupes, & Knaves: The Antiwar Movement, Unmasked*.

I’m going to be extremely charitable to Nick Gillespie and n0t suggest that he’s any one of those three, though.  Because while his bitterness is palpable, he and I do have similar opinions on how nice it would be if we hacked back the government a bit.  Or a lot.  Anyway, Nick’s aforementioned bitterness starts off by noting that the most vituperative members of the antiwar movement (the knaves) clammed up pretty much the moment the Democrats took power**, then really starts in on a nice, representative sample of all those journalists out there who strained gnats under Bush, and swallow camels under Obama.  Nick then concludes:

This isn’t ultimately about ideological hypocrisy – of liberals changing their tune once their guy is in office – but something much more basic and much more disturbing. It reveals that for all their crowing about being watchdogs of all that is good and decent in society, when push comes to shove, too many journalists are ready and willing handmaidens to power – including the power to kill.

(more…)

Feb
07
2013
4

QotD, The Antiwar Movement Getting What They Wanted, Good And Hard edition.

I am not in complete agreement with Jim Geraghty over the foreign policy intentions of this President – I think that Barack Obama is black-boxing his natsec responses to match what he thinks Bush would do, and that means that Barack Obama will probably try to intervene in Syria* – but I can recognize the power of this attitude (without sharing it**):

Hey, my Turkish friends so upset by a bloody civil war across the border and a flood of refugees, remember “Valley of the Wolves: Iraq”? Remember when that film suggested that Jewish U.S. army doctors in Iraq were harvesting organs from Iraqi civilians to be sold in Israeli, and that U.S. soldiers use Iraqi children as human shields? Yeah, remember that? Well, go solve your #*%&^ border problems yourself.

(more…)

Jan
06
2012
3

#rsrh Glenns Greenwalds are whining again.

Instapundit’s Glenn Reynolds notes – not publicly gleefully – that Glenns Greenwalds are very upset.  It seems that Greenwalds are bothered by the fact that while it was apparently OK to call Reynolds evil for endorsing a targeted assassination program against Iranian nuclear weapons engineers and terrorist-enabling mullahs, it’s apparently not OK for Obama to be criticized for effectively signing off on such a program.  It’s apparently even worse to publicly approve of Ron Paul’s Israel views when compared to Barack Obama’s.  Poor Greenwalds are feeling aggrieved. And betrayed. And scorned.

In order: (more…)

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com