Even the wingnuts get it

At last some people on the right are beginning to realise that the stories of torture and abuse in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and Bagram can't be dismissed as 'a few rotten apples' or 'lies and smears by the liberal media'

Perry de Haviland of Samizdata.net says:

The Taliban is history and Al Qaeda is a mere shadow of its former self, so the question is why are US (and UK) forces still in effective control of Afghanistan? The latest example of appalling behaviour by US interrogators (who appear to have tortured a taxi cab driver to death at Bagram for being in the wrong place at the wrong time) is starting to turn local opinion against the over-mightly US presence. Not only do the people responsible need to be suitably called to account a good way up the chain of command, clearly there are some serious institutional problems in sections of the US military that need to be stamped on pretty harshly.

I've always believe the memetic war (the battle of ideas) is far more important than the actual shooting war. If we can't win over the hearts and minds of ordinary people in Afganistan, Iraq and other parts of the middle east, we cannot win by any means short of total war. Torturing innocent people to death, setting attack dogs on naked prisoners, or desecrating Korans are not the way to promote western values of democracy, freedom and individual rights. No matter how cathartic it might be to some idiotic middle Americans.

Personally I think the buck goes as far up the chain of command as Donald Rumsfeld himself. He's a classic rightwing alpha-geek, which is why so many rightwing geeks worship him. He may well be a tactical genius, seeing battles as a gigantic board game. But like a lot of geeks, he's socially clueless. He's got no idea about winning over hearts and minds. He can't see why the prisoner abuses will lose the war if they go on unchecked. He sees combatants as cardboard game tokens rather than flesh-and-blood people. He needs to go.

Posted by TimHall at May 22, 2005 02:02 PM | TrackBack

Comments

You make yourself look rather undiscerning by calling me, who supports drug legalisation, personal choice on abortion, homosexual marriage (by virtue of denying the state any role in the issue of marriage) and an end to immigration restrictions, a 'wingnut'. Weird.

Posted by: Perry de Havilland on May 22, 2005 04:19 PM

What about "I would like to see the whole of Kent paved over?". I'd call that Wingnut....

Posted by: Tim Hall on May 22, 2005 04:39 PM

Realy? Why? Perhaps you do not actually know what the term means The usage is "He was buttoned down so tight he needs wingnut"... in other words an old fashioned social conservative who disapproves of gays, thinks rock is the music of the devil and regards the state as being there to enforce the social norms of which they approve Think Pat Buchannan or Strom Thurmond in the USA or Anne Widdicombe or Mary Whitehouse in the UK). I am a laissez faire free marketeer, and that includes the market of ideas and social solutions, which is not the same thing at all.

Posted by: Perry de Havilland on May 22, 2005 05:06 PM

Hrm. Your characterisation of Rummy sounds like so much hysteria from the left. Not to mention your ridiculously and blatantly one-sided portrayal on the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. And still you wonder why people ignore you guys...

Posted by: dariuskan on May 24, 2005 11:02 AM

It's the right that "doesn't get it". For a start, I'm not an antiwar leftist. I supported the war against the despicable Taliban, and don't feel any sense of moral outrage at the overthrow of a blood-soaked dictatorship in Iraq. I cheered when US forces caught the bastard.

What the right doesn't seem to recognise is that America made, and continues to make, some major mistakes in the follow-up in Iraq. Anyone who thinks the only solution is to 'blow away the bad guys' has had their brain rotted by too many bad Hollywood action movies.

Posted by: Tim Hall on May 24, 2005 12:58 PM

Yep, they've made some mistakes in Iraq, for sure. Abu Ghraib springs to mind. HOWEVER, and this is where you guys really fall down, they have done a lot of things right, too. You guys have a problem with giving credit where credit's due. The election was a watershed moment. I mean, do you think it's easy occupying a country with a large hostile minority? Are you surprised that mistakes are made and some individuals on the occupying side go loco? Does this mean it wasn't worth doing? No. Your problem is your perspectives are so mightily biased that you can't see what's in front of your faces; things are actually getting better in Iraq. And you all cuss out Fox for showing good news pieces from Iraq, as if good news stories couldn't possibly exist in Iraq. No no, we can't watch that, we only want to see and be told how America's screwing the place up. Pathetic.

Incidentally, I noticed you've fallen for the 'desecrated korans' lie. Don't you know that Newsweek retracted that claim?

Posted by: dariuskan on May 24, 2005 07:12 PM


Go to Where Worlds Collide Front Page Previous Entry « Overated Icons Next Entry RSS question for you » Categories Games Memes Miscellaneous Music News Photos Railways SF Recent Entries As Others See Us Terrorists Amongst Us Poll on Musicals Ouch! Your Ideal RPG Group? Torture Manchester Show 2006 Live Review: Porcupine Tree, Manchester Academy, 30 Sep 2006 Story vs. Experience Banger Blue on TV Full text feed for the News category Summary aggreate feed for the whole site Powered by 2.661	Even the wingnuts get it At last some people on the right are beginning to realise that the stories of torture and abuse in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and Bagram can't be dismissed as 'a few rotten apples' or 'lies and smears by the liberal media' Perry de Haviland of Samizdata.net says: The Taliban is history and Al Qaeda is a mere shadow of its former self, so the question is why are US (and UK) forces still in effective control of Afghanistan? The latest example of appalling behaviour by US interrogators (who appear to have tortured a taxi cab driver to death at Bagram for being in the wrong place at the wrong time) is starting to turn local opinion against the over-mightly US presence. Not only do the people responsible need to be suitably called to account a good way up the chain of command, clearly there are some serious institutional problems in sections of the US military that need to be stamped on pretty harshly. I've always believe the memetic war (the battle of ideas) is far more important than the actual shooting war. If we can't win over the hearts and minds of ordinary people in Afganistan, Iraq and other parts of the middle east, we cannot win by any means short of total war. Torturing innocent people to death, setting attack dogs on naked prisoners, or desecrating Korans are not the way to promote western values of democracy, freedom and individual rights. No matter how cathartic it might be to some idiotic middle Americans. Personally I think the buck goes as far up the chain of command as Donald Rumsfeld himself. He's a classic rightwing alpha-geek, which is why so many rightwing geeks worship him. He may well be a tactical genius, seeing battles as a gigantic board game. But like a lot of geeks, he's socially clueless. He's got no idea about winning over hearts and minds. He can't see why the prisoner abuses will lose the war if they go on unchecked. He sees combatants as cardboard game tokens rather than flesh-and-blood people. He needs to go. Posted by TimHall at May 22, 2005 02:02 PM \| TrackBack Comments You make yourself look rather undiscerning by calling me, who supports drug legalisation, personal choice on abortion, homosexual marriage (by virtue of denying the state any role in the issue of marriage) and an end to immigration restrictions, a 'wingnut'. Weird. Posted by: Perry de Havilland on May 22, 2005 04:19 PM What about "I would like to see the whole of Kent paved over?". I'd call that Wingnut.... Posted by: Tim Hall on May 22, 2005 04:39 PM Realy? Why? Perhaps you do not actually know what the term means The usage is "He was buttoned down so tight he needs wingnut"... in other words an old fashioned social conservative who disapproves of gays, thinks rock is the music of the devil and regards the state as being there to enforce the social norms of which they approve Think Pat Buchannan or Strom Thurmond in the USA or Anne Widdicombe or Mary Whitehouse in the UK). I am a laissez faire free marketeer, and that includes the market of ideas and social solutions, which is not the same thing at all. Posted by: Perry de Havilland on May 22, 2005 05:06 PM Hrm. Your characterisation of Rummy sounds like so much hysteria from the left. Not to mention your ridiculously and blatantly one-sided portrayal on the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. And still you wonder why people ignore you guys... Posted by: dariuskan on May 24, 2005 11:02 AM It's the right that "doesn't get it". For a start, I'm not an antiwar leftist. I supported the war against the despicable Taliban, and don't feel any sense of moral outrage at the overthrow of a blood-soaked dictatorship in Iraq. I cheered when US forces caught the bastard. What the right doesn't seem to recognise is that America made, and continues to make, some major mistakes in the follow-up in Iraq. Anyone who thinks the only solution is to 'blow away the bad guys' has had their brain rotted by too many bad Hollywood action movies. Posted by: Tim Hall on May 24, 2005 12:58 PM Yep, they've made some mistakes in Iraq, for sure. Abu Ghraib springs to mind. HOWEVER, and this is where you guys really fall down, they have done a lot of things right, too. You guys have a problem with giving credit where credit's due. The election was a watershed moment. I mean, do you think it's easy occupying a country with a large hostile minority? Are you surprised that mistakes are made and some individuals on the occupying side go loco? Does this mean it wasn't worth doing? No. Your problem is your perspectives are so mightily biased that you can't see what's in front of your faces; things are actually getting better in Iraq. And you all cuss out Fox for showing good news pieces from Iraq, as if good news stories couldn't possibly exist in Iraq. No no, we can't watch that, we only want to see and be told how America's screwing the place up. Pathetic. Incidentally, I noticed you've fallen for the 'desecrated korans' lie. Don't you know that Newsweek retracted that claim? Posted by: dariuskan on May 24, 2005 07:12 PM Post a comment Name: Email Address: URL: Comments: Remember info?	Links of the day The Wages of Spam is Jail Britain's worse spammer, Peter Francis-Macrae gets six years in jail. Let's Call It "Subjectivism" The Gline posts a hatchet job on the high priestess of internet trolls, Ayn Rand. History Doesn't Repeat But sometimes it rhymes. Quotes from the American Taliban The American hard right are such nice people. I know some of these individuals are fringe lunatics, such as the infamous Fred Phelps. But some others listed are rather more influential. The Worst Children's Book of All Time? Called Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed!. It won't sell. Randroids don't reproduce and don't have 4 to 8 year old children to indoctrinate. <br /> <br />