FIRE THE WAR PIMPS -- By Ted Rall

[Khephra]

By Ted Rall

Zero Tolerance for Iraq (news - web sites) War Pundits


NEW YORK--A year and a half late and 30,000 lives short, supporters of the war in Iraq finally admit that they were wrong.

When I appeared on Bill O'Reilly's show recently, his bellicose bravado was MIA. We argued about Bush and war, but he studiously avoided talking about Iraq. The Fox News demagogue limited his attacks to my opposition to the war against Afghanistan (news - web sites). To his credit O'Reilly, formerly a ferocious advocate of the Iraqi invasion, was one of the first media war promoters to concede that Iraq had never been a threat to the United States. "I was wrong," he told ABC in February. "I think every American should be very concerned" that weapons of mass destruction have not been found.


Over at The New York Times, two pro-war columnists who repeatedly parroted the Bush party line--arguing that Gulf War (news - web sites) II was a noble experiment in Middle Eastern democracy, accusing opponents of appeasing Saddam and repeatedly ridiculing skeptics as knee-jerk pacifists who didn't care about the long-suffering Iraqis--have ordered up a heaping plate of crow. "We went into Iraq with what, in retrospect, seems like a childish fantasy," allows Republican war pimp David Brooks. "We were going to topple Saddam, establish democracy and hand the country back to grateful Iraqis. We expected to be universally admired when it was all over. For us to succeed in Iraq," he concludes now, "we have to lose ."


"I supported the war and now I feel foolish," says CNN's Tucker Carlson.

MORE.........

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=127&ncid=742&e=7&u=/ucru/20040518/cm_ucru/firethewarpimps

[indigobusiness]

1. These guys have always got a finger...

in the wind.

[yellowcanine]

2. Give credit where credit is due. At least they are admitting they were

wrong. That is more than you can say for Shrub, Rumsfield, Chaney, Wolfowitz, Hannity, Limpballs, et al.

[struggle4progress]

3. David Brooks is still expecting a miracle ...

to judge by his NYT op-ed piece "In Iraq, America's Shakeout Moment" today.

[wtmusic]

5. Brooks admits we made an intellectual mistake

not a moral one. Surprise! He's STILL wrong!

[Mechatanketra]

9. Yeah. Wish I could say better about our leaders.

I think, strictly speaking, that (intellectual, not moral, mistake) describes the reigning view among congressional Democrats, including our savior presumptive John Kerry. Most of these people never say the war in Iraq was inherently wrong, even retroactively -- we're not even presented with the slim dignity of "Oh god, I didn't think the gun was loaded!" but instead get "I didn't think he'd have any friends to back him up!" That we're killing other people without any valid justification doesn't seem to bug many people in office -- just that we haven't finished with 'em all already.

[indigobusiness]

8. It takes a big man to admit being wrong...

but I can't help questioning the convictions of men who go where the wind blows.

[Beetwasher]

4. Brutal, Scathing and Right on the Money

Rall nailed it.

[tom_paine]

6. As always, nicely done by Mr. Rall

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[hadrons]

7. Rall gives O'Reilly too much credit ....

Charles Gibson (I believe) nearly had to pull Clown O'Really teeth to get him to admit that he said that he wouldn't trust the Bush adminstartion again after no WMD were found

[Martin Eden]

10. the last paragraph is truly scathing

especially when directed at one's professional counterparts:

The pro-war pundits got the biggest story of their careers dead wrong. Now a lot of people are wrongly dead. The fact that this sorry lot still draw paychecks is a tribute to America's infinite capacity for forgiveness.

[Miss Authoritiva]

11. I would add this line, too:

"Whether their integrity or their intelligence was compromised, they should never again be taken seriously."

We see the same 20 or so people over and over again on the cable news programs and in print, boldly making predictions that never come true, making analyses that are predicated on multiple conditionals (if..if...and if, then....) and thus totally meaningless, and checking off their party-supplied checklist of talking points. And to add personal pimping to their political pimping, they do endless rounds of interviews promoting their cut-and-paste books that contain bold predictions that never come true, etc, etc.

Why should anybody take these people seriously?

[bpilgrim]

12. " The WordPerfect Warriors" - rall is on FIRE!

:toast:

peace