dicksmith still as sharp as a nerf basketball
This man truly is criminally idiotic. Well, maybe not criminally, but indisputably anyway:
You’re surprised I’m sure. But even as President Bush was stating to the American people that “every measure has been taken to avoid war.”, his administration had already been planning ways to instigate a war with Iraq as early as December of 2001.
Through the Freedom of Information Act, the National Security Archive at George Washington University has obtained notes from a meeting between then-SECDEF Donald Rumsfeld and then-CENTCOM commander General Tommy Franks in which planning for the Iraq war was underway. One of the points discussed was how to start a war with Iraq…
Are you ready for the smoking gun? OK, here goes, it is from a memo:
Now, let’s work on some logical thinking. Let’s assume that dick is right, and “How start?” used in this context actually means “How can we precipitate a war with Iraq”, the first way we might do so would be to get Saddam to move against the Kurds? How the hell are we going to do that? Maybe Tony Camerino and dicksmith could stare at goats and invade Saddam’s brain? We could harness the brain power of the collective trust of them to infiltrate the dreams of the Iraqi dictator to make him do our bidding.
Now, here is a test, and you tell me what you think.
In the context of this memo, “How Start?” most likely means:
1) How can the US start a war with Iraq? Answer: by manipulating Saddam to invade the north.
2) What is the most likely genesis of a war with Iraq? Answer: Saddam invades the north.
3) How can I start this briefing using ambiguous language so that down the road VoteVets can use tortured logic (oops, sorry for the torture reference) to assume that we are trying to start a war with iraq. Answer: “How start?”
Is it *not* entirely clear that #2 is the only answer susceptible to rational interpretation?
Category: Politics
Dicksmith needs to take a look at the Eight action memo from WWII, which purportedly showed that the official policy was to provoke Japan into attacking. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCollum_memo)
Then, as now, we have military planners whose sole job is to play ‘what if’ and put it in a memo. That doesn’t mean we followed that plan, or that any of the brass ever read the memo. But where the McCollum memo in 1939 was clear about what it was speculating on, the memo above is more like scribblings on a cocktail napkin.
Is it *not* entirely clear that #2 is the only answer susceptible to rational interpretation?
You ARE talking about dicksmith ya know….
If not “Criminally” insane, surely he is “Clinically” insane. I could easy come to that conclusion in the several e-mails he wrote to me “after” I told him I didn’t want to hear his drivel. Kept writing with; but, but, but, don’t you see, aren’t you aware of, etc.
Yes, Clinically Insane fits……………..
I personally believe some types of stupidity should be criminal. This crap fits that category.
Here is some additional information which was known back in the 1990’s about the Saddam regime:
They provided logistical and training support for at least three significant terrorist groups that we were tracking. One of those terrorist leaderss ended up getting on the wrong side of Saddam and was murdered in Iraq by his operatives.
They offered a bounty of $25,000.00 on each American killed that they could verify.
They frequently fired on coalition aircraft enforcing the no fly zones (this was UN AUTHORIZED, so there cannot be any liberal nonsense about how it was unjust or unfair or any of that crap).
The business about developing nuclear weapons turned out to be an intelligence disinformation operation, but given the unstable rogue government, it was perfectly reasonable to accord it credibility. The disinformation program was very well done, and I would rather assume they could do it and find out they could not, than the other way around. Had they possessed any sort of nukes it would have seriously destabilized that entire region, and that just would not do. The 1st Marine Division DID discover at least two sites where there was substantial presence of nuclear materials (radioactivity was heavy in those sites) but did not find the materials themselves.
These facts mean something to the stable folks of the country but probably not to this fellow. He just does not seem to be too taken with reality when it does not reinforce his world view.
A shame.