F***k you, David Brooks, you f*******g warmonger

[impik]

If you didn't read David Brooks' column in the New York Times today, you don't know what a real mercenary is. What a disgrace.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/30/opinion/30brooks.html?ref=opinion

[stray cat]

1. Its clear he disagrees with the majority DU opinion -

[Mel Rosian]

2. I pity Brooks!

Poor schmuck doesn't know which side he's on from one day to the next!

[Sebass1271]

3. who is he? his name sounds familiar. Is he the one that wrote

the book, Blinded by the right? cuz i liked that book!!

[WyLoochka]

6. You are thinking of David Brock

The guy who is capable of learning and making amends for his past mistakes.

This is David Brooks who used to write for the Weekly Standard and is/was a big buddy of Willie Kristol. He now writes an opinion column for the NYT.

[bulloney]

4. Ask a military "expert" if we need more troops and what do you expect?

It's a rare bird that will say we should withdraw from any military action anywhere. They want to keep jobs secure for their colleagues.

I also question if Brooks randomly selected military officials, or did he find a list of people that he knew would give him the answers he wanted. It's like going to Gainesville, Florida and asking who would win a Florida-Alabama football game.

[NRaleighLiberal]

5. He needs to watch Judy Woodruff's interview of Matthew Hoh last night.

Not that it would make a difference, I am sure.

[Ilsa]

7. Was this on PBS ' NewsHour? I'm not getting PBS yet, but I'm

willing to check it out if he gave a detailed interview.

[NRaleighLiberal]

8. Search for it on the PBS newshour site - it is well, well worth it.

[bullwinkle428]

11. Here's an excellent interview from NPR:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=114287485

[zulchzulu]

9. "It would be shameful to deploy more troops only to withdraw them later."

True, Mr. Brooks. We need ENDLESS WAR!

And then there's this:

Gen. Stanley McChrystal has said that counterinsurgency is “an argument to win the support of the people.” But it’s not an argument won through sophisticated analysis. It’s an argument won through the display of raw determination.

Raw determination? Is that like blindly going into a war to win the support of a "people" who basically have lived in the Stone Ages since the Stone Ages and speak their own languages in their own villages that they and their ancestors haven't left for CENTURIES? A "people" who absolutely revile the "official government" and don't even recognize them as a ruling class?

Let's show raw determination, everyone. Look at that wall next to you. Stand up! Run into the wall at full speed where you let the impact hit you directly on the head! Repeat! Repeat!

That's the kind of "raw determination" Brooks is suggesting.

[ieoeja]

10. David Brooks: "If the president cannot find that core conviction, we should get out now."

[Hansel]

12. Wow, this is so weird coming from a neocon.

:sarcasm: