Also at DKos.
General Tommy Franks, head of Central Command during the “combat phase” of Operation Iraqi Freedom, thought Doug Feith was the dumbest (expletive deleted) guy on the planet. Feith may be a dolt, but he has nothing in the effing dumb department on his political mentor Dick Cheney. Old “Last Throes” was in classic form this week in Guam, where he met with U.S. troops and local officials.
Here are some excerpts from the Associated Press coverage of his visit.
US Vice-President Dick Cheney says the American people will not back a policy of retreat in Iraq, a day after Britain announced a large-scale troop pullout.
Never mind Cheney’s use of the distracting but emotionally charged term “retreat.” Given his standing in the polls and the results of our November election, what in the name of science and sanity makes him think he can speak for the “American people?”
In Guam he met with American troops and local officials who support a buildup of forces on the isolated island. His brief stopover attracted 2,000 troops and residents to hear his speech.
If you’ve ever been to Guam, you know there’s not a heck of a lot to do there. That all a speech by the vice president of the United States could draw was 2,000 people–mostly Navy and Air Force personnel who had no choice other than to attend–tells you that Cheney is as popular in Guam as he is everywhere else.
But here’s where Cheney really flashed his Bozo badge (from the official White House Transcript):
By positioning forces on Guam, the United States can move quickly and effectively to protect our friends, to defend our interests, to bring relief in times of emergency, and to keep the sea lanes open to commerce and closed to terrorists.
Keep the sea lanes closed to terrorists? For God’s sake, Cheney, the “terrorists” don’t have a navy and they never will. Do you actually believe they’ll ever be able to control sea lanes in the Northern Pacific Ocean? Or do you just think the rest of us are dumb enough to believe that on your say so?
Dumb Like a Fox
By now, nearly everyone knows how Dick Cheney has funneled untold billions of war profits to his pals at Halliburton and its subsidiary, KBR. Not so well known is KBR’s history for securing naval support contracts. If America starts a mother loving naval war with Iran, hey boy–who is going to profit from that?
Dick Cheney isn’t just one of the worst things that ever happened to America. He’s one of the worst things that happened to humanity. This man, one of history’s greatest warmongers and war profiteers, is the same guy who had ten years worth of “other priorities” when it was time to fight the war of his generation. And to think: many veterans who fought in the Vietnam War that Cheney opted out of still support Cheney’s militaristic worldview.
One hears that in social situations, Cheney is a charming guy. I’m sure that’s true, but here’s some advice. If you ever find yourself in an intimate setting with him, and he offers you an apple, don’t take it.
#
Commander Jeff Huber, U.S. Navy (Retired) writes from Virginia Beach, Virginia. Read his commentaries at Pen and Sword.
I hear that it’s probably not safe to go hunting with him either.
And if you go huntng with him, you might want to wear better body armor than our troops have.
He’s not even trying to make sense anymore is he Jeff(not that old Last Throes made that much sense anyway). Yes sir Dickie, I can just see al-Qaeda zipping around in all their naval glory do dastardly deeds at sea…with the Taliban Navy right behind them…I think those Iraqi insurgents might be whipping up their own little navy also-there’s just no end to all these ‘terist’ naval fleets out there cluttering up the ocean.
You know I’d be willing to bet he’s only ‘charming’ to people with the same amount in bank account as himself…actually maybe not even then.
He’s not even trying to make sense. Just pandering to the incognizant right.
I’ve gotta recommend this diary based on the title alone. LOL.
While Cheney and Rumsfeld may be the ultimate devil’s spawn of the Militray-Industrial Complex, what makes any of us think that Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama or John Edwards will eb any different in the basic outlines of what they will do after they are elected?
I offer the following pieces as evidence:
1.None of these worthies has challenged the basic premise of the PNAC document that proposes to maintain American Hegemony well into the twenty-first century by maintaining military dominance over the resource rich Third World.
2.They have not objected to any of the premises of this administration on moral grounds.
3.All of them, after announcing their candidacies, have already made their mandatory pilgrimages to the Israeli warmongers’ havens like Herziliya,AIPAC and AEI to swear their loyalty oaths to Israel’s policies.
None of them has dared to comment on President Carter’s description of Israel’s current policies in the Occupied Territories as Apartheid.
4.I am certain all of them will line up when the current crop of madmen in the WH will unleash their war on Iran and ask how they can support it.
…that they’re all afraid to stand up to the neocons directly because they’ll be accused of being weak on defense and soft on terrorism.
Those neo-bastards have everyone bent over the table.