Thursday, April 03, 2003

Jessica Lynch Airport
I noticed that our troops rolled essentially unopposed onto the tarmac of what was Saddam Hussein International Airport in Baghdad. It occurred to me that the airport is going to have to change its name. Just a guess. So how about we name it for a hero of the war of liberation? Sure, George W. Bush Airport would be nice, but we're going to have plenty of those over here. Donald Rumsfeld Airport is another thought, but Rummy is so shy and retiring I don't think he'd be comfortable with that. One of our greatest heroes, who fought the fascists until she ran out of ammunition, was severely wounded, captured, probably tortured and then miraculously rescued. What a story! Why not commemorate it by naming the airport for her, PFC Jessica Lynch of the 507th Maintenance Division? Then everyone coming in to or going out of Baghdad will think about the kind of commitment and sacrifice displayed by the US and British forces who ridded Iraq of a bloody totalitarian autocrat, whose name will be chiseled out of every monument, whose statues will be pulled down and whose picture will never be shown again in public in the country he plunged into "years of darkness, rivers of blood". Also, a statue of Jessica will be a lot easier to look at than one of what's his name.
I can't believe someone is actually complaining that the UN, the hope of the world, the replacement for nasty unilateral undemocratic individual nations, is "powerless", that "The U.N. secretary-general has done nothing to stop the war, in fact the U.N. secretary-general has done something in the opposite direction." I suspected as much. Kofi Annan was on our side all along. Darn. Another illusion shattered. If you can't depend on the UN to keep people from destroying your bloody totalitarian autocracy, what can you depend on?

Fisk - or Custer?
Hmm. I thought Robert Fisk was a journalist. In this delusional breathless manifesto, he comes off as a true-believer, last-ditch supporter of a bloody totalitarian autocracy. But I must have forgotten. He's a leftist journalist! That's right, Fiskie, there's a secret weapon that the Great Leader will set off from his bunker and drive the J-E-W-S and Crusaders back into the desert and the sea. Then on to Jerusalem! The next group of Islamic street kids that beats Fisk up will be waving copies of his article, and shouting the names of their relatives killed by Saddam. And that beating he will deserve, but I'm sure he won't admit it.
War, what war?
James Keegan of the Telegraph (from the Melbourne Age), has it just about right:

Saddam, or whoever is in charge, is fighting the strangest war. Indeed, it is tempting to wonder, on the evidence so far presented, whether the Iraqis have been fighting a war at all.

He goes over all the things the US forces did without much resistance from Saddam's forces and the rhetoric the left and the appeasers swallowed so easily and concludes:

Unless and until there is some serious fighting, observers will be left with the eerie impression that the Second Gulf War is not really taking place.

Of course. This was all arranged in advance. Saddam is(was) a CIA spy. Bin Laden is a Jew. And our few but honored dead are still alive. I wish.

Lileks boots it
James Lileks, in his Backfence column, makes some snarky comments:

Yes, I know -- the big dispute concerns whether THE PLAN had enough "boots on the ground," as people who like to sound in-the-know love to say. (Brings to mind a huge cannon stuffed with boots, blasting footwear all over the desert.) It's an interesting debate, and seven years from now I expect to find a History Channel documentary at 11 on Sunday night that will put it all into perspective. For now I find the imbroglio over THE PLAN less interesting than events on the boot-strewn ground, and I find the latter better served by newspapers.

And then, life imitates art, at Fox, no less:

Iraqi Soldiers Shed Their Uniforms

Coalition forces swept through roads littered with black combat boots as Saddam Hussein's loyalists, hoping to avoid capture, shed their uniforms and switched to tribal robes.

Take that, smarty child-rearing dad humorist!


Reliable reports relate today that coalition tank and infantry forces have closed to within three feet (1 metre) of the centre of Baghdad. The Iraqi Information Ministry indignantly denied the claims. Minister Saheed Sahaf, who has now changed his name to Sd Sf, to save space, called the Coalition reports lies and says, “There are no coalition forces in this hemisphere! Look, look, I can swing my arms wildly without hitting anyone!” His statement was interrupted by cries of “Ouch!” and “Hey, watch where you’re swinging your arms!” from several US Marines, Army Rangers and Coast Guard foretopmen.

In related news, the Iraqis denied British claims to have liberated a chain of fish and chips shops and several pubs in Basra. “This is a Muslim country!” said the Iraqi Defense Minister, from his position six inches behind the Information Minister. “The ignorant Crusaders do not realize that “chips” are specifically outlawed by three separate sections of the Koran? Foo on your infidel potatoes! As for pubs, yes we have those, but we can prove the British have not taken them because I was just in one and the beer is still cold. We have the aggressive aggressor invaders just where we want them! Welcome to our quagmire, Christian soldiers! No one here gets out alive!”, the last to the tune of “Hotel California”. As Coalition forces collapsed onto the last portion of Baghdad, a great sucking sound was heard and scientists theorize that a black hole spontaneously formed and consumed the fiercely resisting Iraqis. At the end only a swirling black moustache could be seen, fluttering like a maple leaf down, down into the vortex of evil.
The actual quote from the Information Minister goes like this:
"They're not even [within] 100 miles," he said. "They are not in any place. They hold no place in Iraq. This is an illusion. ... They are trying to sell to the others an illusion." And that's from CNN.

Sunday, March 30, 2003

Oh, Brave Hollywood!
Albawaba has it nailed. The just and righteous Jack Valenti has stood up to the nefarious Bush-ite fascism and rejected the demands of the Washington cultural tyranny that Hollywood support the unprovoked aggression on Iraq. Ah, yes, the Johnson-stooge learned all he needed to know at the feet of the master. How can an entire culture fall for this kind of nonsense?

This article shows as clearly as anything how bizarre the editorial viewpoint of this so-called news organization is. "Uncle Saddam" may be released, but I doubt anyone's going to draw the kinds of conclusions from it that the editors seem to have tacked on to the end to support their version of current events.

The sad thing is that these Mideastern numbwits, who have been told over and over "Hollywood opposes the war" don't realize that this doesn't meam that Jack Valenti or Susan Sarandon or Barbra Streisand or Martin Sheen or Danny Glover ever actually will DO anything to actively oppose the war. Oh, no , dear me, that might involve, you know, economic loss. It's kind of like protesting with Rob Reiner against the evils of tobacco and then smoking in your next movie. It's all business, darling, surely you understand, n'est-ce pas?
It strikes me that the vaunted Iraqi military, with its tanks and Scuds and poison gas and SAM missiles, has accomplished exactly nothing against the military might of the US and Britain. No coalition tanks have been destroyed in tank-to-tank battles. No Iraqi aircraft have even left the ground. No infantry charges have overwhelmed US Marines. No aircraft have been downed by surface-to-air missiles. The only casualties we've suffered have been from a group of mechanics who wandered away from the main body and were captured or executed by irregulars, and by fake surrenders of what looked to be paramilitaries and by suicide bombings. So what has all those billions for all that military hardware, squeezed from the starving, disease-ridden Iraqi people, produced for Saddam? Nothing but ashes in his mouth.

Good place for them!
I thought it was reassuring, Homeland-Security-wise, that it's reported that 4,000 Arab martyrs are heading for Iraq, where they will, like thousands of their brethren, throw themselves on the guns of our tanks and APCs and Bradleys rather than carrying homicide bombs into Israel or Ireland or Iowa. Better start cranking up the virgin-producing machines upstairs. You're going to be getting a lot of business. And isn't that what Homeland Security is all about anyway? Bringing the battle to Basra rather than Boston? God knows the Marines and Army are better equipped for fighting Arab would-be martyrs than four-year-olds in the suburbs or secretaries in high-rises downtown. And without the Marines and the Army, that's where the martyrs would be heading. Kill them all.

ColbyCosh, the Albertan wunderkind, apparently agrees. Just ignore the hockey and manufactured epidemic stuff and scroll on down to the advice to potential martyrs. The more martyrs whose death-wishes we satisfy now, the fewer will be left for the Battle of Damascus and the Battle of Tehran and the Battle of Riyadh and the Battle of Cairo - hmm, I'd better warn my sister to get out before that last one happens.