I read the first few pages of Mr. Podhoretz and noted his description of Margaret Thatcher as having been Prime Minister of England. That kind of sloppy presentation of facts does not augur well for us having any confidence in the man’s grasp of the nuances elsewhere.

The fact that many Bush supporters are unable to think of realistic possibilities other than inaction or what Bush did is unfortunate, but try again.

To be blunt, lonewacko, you claim there are “realistic possibilities”, but your only argument for it has been that Bush supporters are dumb.

Remember, the question is “realistic possibilities that are neither inaction nor what Bush did.” I can think of several options other than force, but they seem to me to reduce to inaction.

One main possible course of action I have in mind has a strong propaganda component.

So you do have an option in mind, but you won’t actually tell us what it is — just allude to it and claim it’s better.

No wonder you like Kerry.

Whether Bush could have pulled that off is quite questionable.

Which means you don’t actually think your plan is realistic either.

Jesus, man, at least try to make some sense.

He’s turned on Bush for one reason, and one reason only – everyone knows what it is and it has nothing to do with Iraq.

He knows Kerry will abandon the War on Terror – but Sullivan has to pretend he won’t or else he’ll have to explain why he’s decided that prosecution of the war is less important than whether a candidate will oppose the judiciary’s attempt to impose gay marriage on the United States.

Sullivan’s shallowness is on display for everyone to see.

I never much trusted intel beyond what our own patrols brought back and TTMA (turn the map around).

I once asked Thibaud about his credentials and he was good enough to tell us. Unlike Kerry supporters, I do not think military credentials are required to have a thoughtful opinion but it does give a sense of where you are coming from. So, I am interested in your background. Do you have military/Intelligence community experience? Do you work for a defense contractor or think tank? Are you an historian or do you take a general interest in military history, e.g., read people like John Keegan?

As I said I don’t think you need to be credentialed to provide thoughtful opionions. However, so far I have seen no specific proposals from you on soft power that are backed by historical evidence. By the way I was on the Afghan campaign PSYOP working group.

The other day they found yet another mass grave in Iraq. Small children were bound and executed and thrown in that grave on top of their mothers. Propaganda is all well and good but when you are dealing with people who do such things it is naive and stupid to think that you can talk your way out of standing up to the dictator. Sooner or later you have to back up the propaganda with something other than more propaganda.

I am not ashamed we did it, I am ashamed we did not do it before those babies were machine gunned.

So take your moral superiority and stuff it.

What can I say to someone who seems to favor bombs even when propaganda could be an even more effective alternative? Even when bombs are necessary, propaganda is almost always a necessary addition.

In any case, in that earlier thread I was responding to yet another attempt by Bush supporters to excuse Bush’s incompetence. “The French were received billions from Saddam, what could Bush do? Bush had no other choice!”

The fact that many Bush supporters are unable to think of realistic possibilities other than inaction or what Bush did is unfortunate, but try again. One main possible course of action I have in mind has a strong propaganda component. Whether Bush could have pulled that off is quite questionable. But, then again, he was successful in vilifying France and Germany but not in a way that really mattered or has had much of an effect outside the U.S.

No, actually it’s kind of chilly here this morning.

I hope none of the rest of us are literally on fire today either, as that would be tragic and sad.

You might want to look up what “literally” means.

Okay, so this is a little bit of a pet peeve.

If one desires a reformed Democratic Party, pull the lever for Bush. You want change? Contribute to a vote that demonstrates to the Democratic Party just how out-of-touch it is with the American voter. Watch how fast they change once they realize that it is costing them elections.