Lieberman: War Critics Are On al-Qaeda’s Side (They Don’t Hate America, They’re Just Dumb)

-

It’s become fashionable in the blogosphere to take whacks at the Joe Lieberman pinata from time to time. With his piece in today’s Washington Post, he’s earned himself a few more shots.
I’ll confess I’ve given Senator Lieberman more leeway over the last few years than many of my colleagues and friends have, and far more, in retrospect than he has deserved. Why? I’m not willing to write off anyone over a single issue, no matter how important that issue is.
A lot of people voted to give President Bush the authority to invade Iraq. Some have apologized. Some won’t apologize, but, with the benefit of hindsight, would have done things differently. Some would do things the same way. All three groups include well-intentioned public servants with whom I agree more often than not. Lieberman, for example, has a solid record on issues that my organization works on and that I care a lot about.
So what makes Lieberman different? From this morning’s Post:

“When politicians here declare that Iraq is “lost” in reaction to al-Qaeda’s terrorist attacks and demand timetables for withdrawal, they are doing exactly what al-Qaeda hopes they will do, although I know that is not their intent.”

My immediate reaction? Thanks for the clarification: war critics aren’t helping al-Qaeda by design – they’re just so dumb that they’ve fallen right into al-Qaeda’s trap.
What sets Lieberman apart from the pack is not his support of Bush administration policies, it’s his adoption of its fear-based rhetoric, his intentional simplification of a complex situation into victory versus surrender, and his demonization of those who hold alternative views.
Until he’s willing to respect people who hold opposing viewpoints, I won’t be inclined to respect him either. Swing away at that pinata, folks.
— Scott Paul

Comments

18 comments on “Lieberman: War Critics Are On al-Qaeda’s Side (They Don’t Hate America, They’re Just Dumb)

  1. Pissed Off America says:

    I am currently doing a home that requires a considerable commute. I hate to admit it, but I have taken to listening to right wing talk radio. Hannity, Savage, Limbaugh, etc.
    Any of you that haven’t experienced right wing talk radio, I suggest you give it a listen for a week or so. These people are so God damned sick that it defies description. Listening to these people really underscores how evil the leadership of this nation truly is. The only way they can survive is by catering to the ignorant and the uninformed. And apparently there is no shortage of them.
    Anyway, they all are currently singing the praises for Joe Lieberman. Across the board, these slimeballs think Lieberman is the cat’s meow. How proud he must be to have some drooling lunatic asshole like Sean Hannity idolizing him.

    Reply

  2. Gadfly says:

    Poor Lieberman– he’s so out-of-touch with reality that only mores George W. Bush hugs-‘n’kisses will appease his worry.
    Tragically, Lieberman regurgitates the AIPAC party-line and deludes himself that he’s helping his constituency (Israel). But this is sheer folly.
    Lieberman is an arrogant man who has repeatedly shown that his allegiance is to Israel and that the American people do not matter — he actually believes that he has an aristocratic right to his seat in the Senate.
    Will the voters of Connecticut ever wake up?

    Reply

  3. TonyForesta says:

    Joe is an apostate so enamoured with, and mesmerized by the fascist warmongers, profiteers, and pathological liars and their faux toughguy chicken hawk kabuki theater that he cannot decifer reality from the patent lies pimped by the Bush government.
    While it is cold comfort that Joe has such intimate understanding of al Quaida operations, tactics, and strategies, – he is wildly mistaken if he thinks Americans outside the fascist confines of the WH care about what al Quaida thinks or wants. We don’t. Were the US military to quit roaming the streets of Baghdad like legionaires policing a civil war, – the Iraqi’s themselves would quickly resort to thier tribal and sectarian leaders and militias to eradicate al Quaida cells and mass murderers from Iraq.
    Once Iraqi’s have full control of their own destiny, sans US involvement, military domination, Bush government profiteering, and US ORDINANCE – Iraqi’s would quickly work to remove al Quaida and all foriegn entities murdering their various tribesmen, women, and children.
    Despite the naked lies of fascists warmongers, profiteers and pathological liars like Cheney, – there was no al Quaida mass murder operations in Iraq prior to the Bush governments costly, bloody, noendinsight horrorshow, wayward misadventure, and excuse for wanton profiteering in Iraq.
    Just because the fascist warmongers, profiteers, and pathological liars in the Bush government want to deceive the American people again and pimp the patently FALSE lie that Iraq is the central front of the socalled neverendingwaronterror – does not make it true Joe.
    American are never going to retreat or go back on the defensive against jihadist mass murderers Joe. You and the fascists in the Bush government need to get that straight. Americans left and right are united in the unconditional and relentless mission of hunting, capturing, and killing every single jihadist mass murderer, and all those who aid and abet them on the planet. This endeavor will never succeed using the old world WWII invasion and occupation scenarios with huge land forces and the military industrial complex required to support those land forces occupying foriegn lands. Defeating this jihadist enemy will require political, economic, and mainly police actions. America must utilize all the military and intelligence assets at our disposal employing covert hunter killer teams, special ops, and real (as opposed to fabricated, OSP/OSI/WHIG/Chalabi concocted LIES) intelligence. We can never defeat an invisible enemy by placing huge numbers of US soldiers in uniforms roaming the streets in columns of humvee’s, armor, and transport, erecting massive walled and barbed wire bases with McDonalds and Starback, and occupying foreign nations who despise America. Truly defeating al Quaida will require brilliant, creative, and inventive leadership, tactics and strategies, which precludes any involvement by the fascist warmongers, profiteers, and pathological liars in the Bush government, and ass kissing apologists and parrots like you Joe.
    Resume bowing at the feet of the fascists in the Bush government, – but forget about pretending you are relevent. You are not. You don’t represent the majority of Americans Joe.

    Reply

  4. JohnH says:

    I lost all respect for Joe Lieberman when he and Lynne Cheney used the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) as a vehicle to stifle dissent by demonizing college professors raising questions about 9/11. Shades of Joe McCarthy…

    Reply

  5. ... says:

    …: Warmongers Are On al-Qaeda’s Side (They Don’t Hate America, They’re Just Dumb)

    Reply

  6. mike adair says:

    “I’m not willing to write off anyone over a single issue, no matter how important that issue is” i wonder about this one. i went back and forth with jmm on the leiberman issue. he also thought it unfair and/unwise to judge on a single issue. but what if jl came out for pedophelia? or slavery? or suspending the constitution? i do think any ONE of these issue would cause you and everyone else that hasnt yet to write him off. no?

    Reply

  7. heshie says:

    It is hard to understand where Lieberman is coming from unless you are willing to accept the fact that he has the effects of senility that just seems to be getting worse. As much as I distrust and dislike Lieberman, I would still like to believe he has been reading too much Cervantes lately and pictures himself as Don Quixote in fantasy land convinced he is the only one that can save the world with Bush as his companion Sancho. Of course, the real difference here is that Sancho did not live in the fantasy land that Bush does.

    Reply

  8. MP says:

    A BIT OT, but an interesting piece on Iran…
    http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20070423&s=nafisi042307

    Reply

  9. pauline says:

    “the latest Republican and Connecticut for Lieberman mantra/talking point is:”blame alQaeda.” Petraeus did the same thing yesterday after he gave a briefing to the House.”
    I almost threw my shoes at the tv this morning listening to Billie Bob Krystol on C-Span mouthing the same.

    Reply

  10. Sandy says:

    Wow, eloquently said, David N.
    I wish I could trust Hagel, Carroll. I applaud what he “said”, though. Thanks for the info.

    Reply

  11. Carroll says:

    Anyone who thinks Hagel’s position of a “clean hands” approach to the rest of the world is best for the US (and everyone else in the world) should let him know. I am calling.
    DC Office:
    Tel: (202) 224-4224
    Fax: (202) 224-5213

    Reply

  12. Carroll says:

    Piss on Lieberman.
    Get in the race Chuck.
    All we need is one candidate for 2008 who will put ALL our US policy on the truthy chopping block and force the other pander bears into the real debate of exactly what is America all about anyway?
    Hagel: Support for Israel not ‘automatic’
    E-mail News Brief
    Tell the Editors
    U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel told an Arab-American audience that his support for Israel was not “automatic.” Hagel (R-Neb.), who is considering a run for the presidency, told the Arab American Institute’s annual dinner that he believes Israel and the United States have a “special relationship,” but resented being told by a pro-Israel activist that if he wants backing from the pro-Israel community, his support for Israel should be “automatic.”
    “First, I am an American senator,” Hagel told the AAI audience in Washington on Wednesday, to applause. He also said he would not sacrifice his friendships in the Arab world to please pro-Israel groups.
    “No relationship should be founded on holding hostage other relationships,” Hagel said. “Why can’t I have that relationship” with Israel and its allies “not at the expense of my friends in the Arab world, in the Muslim world? Why must it be a choice? It is not a choice.”

    Reply

  13. Dan says:

    Steve,
    On a related topic, did you get a chance to watch Bill Moyers’ “Buying the War” documentary last night? What are your thoughts about it?

    Reply

  14. Ajaz says:

    Lieberman is stupid, calling those opposed to war as being on Al-Qaida’s side is ridiculous. This argument has been paddled by the neocons to cover up for Bush’s blunder for starting this disasterous war.
    I recall there were many people like Lieberman during the Vietnam war and in the end they had to eat humble pie.

    Reply

  15. susan says:

    the latest Republican and Connecticut for Lieberman mantra/talking point is:”blame alQaeda.” Petraeus did the same thing yesterday after he gave a briefing to the House.
    it won’t take a lot more of this to convince me that “al Qaeda in Iraq” is akin to one of HL Mencken’s hobgoblins, confabulated to keep the populace cowering in fear.

    Reply

  16. S. K. Calb says:

    Thanks, Steve – I guess I’ll take the first shot at the “pinata” ..
    Below is a copy of an email that I sent to Chris Matthews at “Hardball” with cc’s to some other media types.
    The main point is that many professionals saw the likely potential for “quagmire” in Iraq. It was ignored. And now “quagmire” is here. Lieberman assumes that most Americans don’t have the time to do a lot of research on pre-invasion advice. For the most part, he is probably right.
    So he (and others) exploit this by positioning the current Iraq operation as a “typical” military operation that just needs time to run its course – when in fact it is a military blunder and has been one from the start.
    I am listening to Petraeus say how “complicated” Iraq is. He (and others) knew it would be complicated back in 2003.
    ——————————–
    To: Chris Matthews – “Hardball” MSNBC
    cc: Maureen Dowd – NY Times
    Paul Krugman – NY Times
    Bob Herbert – NY Times
    Jay Bookman – Atlanta Journal Constitution
    Keith Olberman – “Countdown” MSNBC
    Re: Chris Matthew’s Analysis of the Bush Defense
    Budget Speech – 4/24/07
    Mr. Matthews,
    I thought your analysis of Bush’s speech was very
    sound.
    I was very pleased that you laid out the facts
    detailing how this war was not only wrong from the start – but how it was wrong in so many different ways.
    You addressed the “wrongness” of attacking Iraq in the absence of a 9/11 connection and etc. I am glad this is being said by you and others – it cannot be said enough.
    I was particularly pleased that you have also started to address the TACTICAL NIGHTMARES regarding this occupation.
    These issues were addressed in FEB. 2003 when the US Army War College came out with its conclusions prior to the invasion. I have been waiting for major media outlets to address this since FEB. 2003.
    Please take note of the following conclusions:
    Conclusion #3:
    To conduct their share of the essential tasks that must be accomplished to reconstruct an Iraqi state, military forces will be SEVERELY TAXED IN MILITARY POLICE, civil affairs, engineer, and transportation units, in addition to possible SEVERE SECURITY DIFFICULTIES.
    Conclusion #4:
    The administration of an Iraqi occupation will be
    COMPLICATED BY DEEP RELIGIOUS, ETHNIC, TRIBAL
    DIFFERENCES WHICH DOMINATE IRAQI SOCIETY.
    Conclusion #5
    U.S. forces may have to MANAGE AND ADJUDICATE
    CONFLICTS AMONG IRAQIS THAT THEY CAN BARELY
    COMPREHEND.
    Conclusion #6
    An exit strategy will require the establishment of political stability, which WILL BE DIFFICULT TO ACHEIVE GIVEN IRAQ’S FRAGMENTED POPULATION, WEAK POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS, AND PROPENSITY FOR RULE BY VIOLENCE.
    (Emphasis added in all cases)
    The fact the the Bush administration choose instead to say “we will be greeted as liberators” while ignoring serious work addressing dangerous yet predictable
    concerns – such as the ones the US Army War College cited above – indicate that this president is not capable of leading ANY war effort.
    (The link to the full US Army War College Report is below. The conclusions cited above are on Page 7):
    http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB182.pdf)
    ——————
    In addition, the fact that the Bush admin. also choose to ignore this … (Iraqi Ayatollah/militia leader sees problems with the proposed 2003 invasion)
    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/iraq/resistance_2-25.html
    ——————
    And this … (Norman Schwarzkopf worries about the Sunnis and Shia after the invasion)
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52450-2003Jan27?language=printer
    ——————
    … all indicate, again, that this president is not capable of leading ANY war effort.
    What the Democrats are doing is far from
    “micromanagement” – it is INTERVENTION.
    If I get into the passenger seat of a car in
    Washington D.C. with the intention of going NORTH to NYC – and I notice that the driver is headed SOUTH on I95 – am I “micromanaging” if I tell the driver he is going the wrong way?
    If he refuses to listen and keeps driving the wrong way, when do I say “I have had enough, I’m getting out” … ?
    Do I wait until Georgia?
    The Florida Keys?
    The Caribbean Sea?
    Never?
    Thank you, Mr. Matthews, for pushing this issue in the right direction.

    Reply

  17. pauline says:

    “What sets Lieberman apart from the pack is not his support of Bush administration policies, it’s his adoption of its fear-based rhetoric…”
    A dynamic fear-based duo for ’08 might just be Giuliani/Lieberman. Anyone catch Rudy’s scaring the electorate recently?
    Rudy Giuliani said if a Democrat is elected president in 2008, America will be at risk for another terrorist attack on the scale of Sept. 11, 2001.
    “If any Republican is elected president – and I think obviously I would be the best at this – we will remain on offense and will anticipate what [the terrorists] will do and try to stop them before they do it,” Giuliani said.
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0407/3684.html
    imo, both of these warmongers are firmly in the grasp of AIPAC. Note, there is ABSOLUTLEY NO TALK OF PEACE PLANS even whispered by any repub candidate’s mouth, especially these two.

    Reply

  18. David N says:

    This is beginning to sound old, even to me.
    None of this bullshit matters. The Liebermann bullshit, the Gulianni bullshit. The Clinton bullshit. It doesn’t matter.
    It’s all empty posturing, so that the tame, captive media can talk about how “tough” they are.
    And it has nothing to do with the actual conflict that is taking place in the world today, or with anything that will actually help make the American people more secure.
    For everyone, it’s about power. It’s about money. It’s about control.
    No one gives a shit about doing their jobs.
    So here I go again:
    If all we do is shoot people, we lose. There is no fixed number of terrorists, or “evildoers,” or whatever. When we kill them, their friends, their children, their companions, their classmates, their neighbors take their place. Read the Army’s counterinsurgency handbook; tough tactics are counterproductive.
    What we have to do is counter the bad ideas that the fundamentalists use as their justification. We have to do this with the good ideas that are the basis for American government and society. Ideas like our constitution, and those in the Princeton Project that Steve had so much to do with promoting.
    The problem is that the junta that has stolen our government does not believe in American ideas or ideals. They fundamentally agree with the beliefs of the “terrorists,” only with different labels.
    The fact that the Iraq war has nothing to do with al-Qa’ida, or 9/11, is also beside the point. The fact that Bush’s failed policies are destroying not just American military, economic, political, diplomatic, and moral power is stupid and tragic and criminal. But that, too, is beside the point.
    Even if we elect a president who will get all the above right, we will still not be engaged in the real battle of ideas that would be our strongest field of endeavor were we to engage in it.
    But we don’t. Because sending out books and building schools and holding debates and arguing our views isn’t percieved by the toady pundit talking heads as “tough.”
    “Tough” is a screaming idiot like Zell Miller, spit flying out of his mouth along with the lies, hate as a substitute for reason, fear as a substitute for security, power as a substitute for responsibility, ignorance as a substitute for faith.
    “Tough” is going to get more Americans killed, and weaken our country even more than it has been in the last six years of delusion and incompetance.
    “Tough” is walls, and barriers, and closed doors, and calling that “offense,” instead of “defense,” as if it made a whit of difference.
    “Tough” is the school bully, and look what good that causes.
    Anybody who wants to be “tough” should be taken out and shot. Then we can start being smart, instead.
    That last, at the end of all the despair, is a joke.
    Ha. Ha. Ha.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *