Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Bush Curses Hezbollah
In a supposed open-mike gaffe, Bush tells Tony Blair a solution to our brewing little World War III (or IV, or V, depending on your predilections): "What they need to do is to get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this [expletive]."
Guess the expletive, win a pony....
R C Dean|7.17.06 @ 12:59PM|#
World War IV.
World War III was the Cold war.
This is just another campaign in the war with the Islamists.
Xmas|7.17.06 @ 12:59PM|#
Well, it's easy. Besides, the Ireland Online article about the gaffe tells you what the expletive is.
|7.17.06 @ 1:00PM|#
My predilection is the Crimean War, Mark II :) Why? Why
not?
Sounds like a reasonable complaint by Bush. Even as annoying as he
and his administration can be, it's a stoic president indeed that
doesn't spend some of his time frustrated by the nonsense that is
the Middle East.
|7.17.06 @ 1:02PM|#
Bush is such a retard. It's like he has no input into whether "they can get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit." It's like me watching TV with a bottle of beer, flipping between shows, seeing the unrest in the middle east, and saying, "jesus, can't they get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit?"
|7.17.06 @ 1:06PM|#
Who in the world said WWV? WWIV I can understand and the link to the Podhoretz piece makes sense for IV, but you have it linked under V. Why?
|7.17.06 @ 1:08PM|#
What exactly do you expect Bush to do, then, abc? Explicitly add the "...or else we'll have to go thump them on the head," or what?
|7.17.06 @ 1:09PM|#
RC, you flatter them by equating them to the
German/Austrian/Ottoman alliance, the Axis powers, and the Warsaw
Pact.
Even if you stretch "Islamist" to include secular Arab
nationalists, the total might of our enemies doesn't even add up to
North Korea 1950, nevermind the entire Soviet Empire.
|7.17.06 @ 1:11PM|#
To quote a friend of mine (Jay Reding over at
www.jayreding.com):
"I�m quite disappointed in the President. He was in Russia for
heaven�s sake. To the Russians, cursing is an art form! If you�re
going to go for it, go for it. What President Bush should have said
is:
'See, the f*cking irony of this completely f*cked up sh*t is what
they really f*cking need to do is to get those goat-humping
bastards in Syria and their limped-dicked prick of an a*shole
President to get those terrorist donkey-raping motherf*ckers in
Hezbollah to stop doing this f*cking sh*t. Yob tvoyu mat�,
blya!'
That would have greatly impressed the Russians."
|7.17.06 @ 1:13PM|#
Yochannon--Because if WWIV already began, as per that link, and if this is a new war (which, yes, he'd probably argue this is merely a new battle in an ongoing war, to which I say, we might as well say it's a continuation of the Israeli/Philistine war), then this is WW V.
|7.17.06 @ 1:13PM|#
One could make argument that it would be WWVI.
WWI - Seven Years' War
WWII - French Revolutionary & Napoleonic Wars
WWIII - What is generally referred to as WWI.
WWIV - What is generally referred to as WWII.
WWV - Cold War
WWVI - The next World War.
|7.17.06 @ 1:13PM|#
The first world war was the Seven Years' War, making this World
War V. ...which, I maintain, is against terrorism rather than
fundamentalist Islam.
...and I'm glad to see the word "supposed" there.
|7.17.06 @ 1:19PM|#
Although if we're counting the Napoleonic Wars, then arguably we should count the War of the Spanish Succession, since it also had some notable extra-European engagements: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Spanish_Succession
|7.17.06 @ 1:20PM|#
Well, President Bush is a grown man and the expletive was well placed. This can all be avoided if Syria is put in its place and Hezbollah is taken out of southern lebanon.
|7.17.06 @ 1:23PM|#
SR,
Well, you could also claim (as some scholars have) that the Seven
Years' War, the warfare involved in the American Revolution &
the French Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars were all part of the
Second Hundred Years' War.
|7.17.06 @ 1:23PM|#
World War IV was the last watchable one. Stallone hasn't done
anything worthwhile since.
Wait, what?
|7.17.06 @ 1:25PM|#
I'm thinkin' Napoleonic Wars, and I was tryin' to think of an
Asian component. Did French forces go over Urals? ...and then I
think, the Ottomans!
...I always forget the Ottomans. You the man, P.L.
|7.17.06 @ 1:29PM|#
Ken Shultz,
There were some naval campaigns in the Indian ocean and maybe some
actual fighting on land in India.
|7.17.06 @ 1:33PM|#
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Give the Ottomans
their empire back, sans their European possessions, and all will be
well with the world.
Provided, of course, that they understand that it's not Istanbul,
it's Constantinople.
|7.17.06 @ 1:34PM|#
Admittedly though, how wars are categorized and named is pretty
arbitrary.
And in the Second Hundred Years' War scenario I should have added
that the starting point should wars conducted by Louis XIV - such
as the War of the League of Augsburg.
|7.17.06 @ 1:35PM|#
The first one speaks for itself, the second one had Tom Cruise in it.....I must have missed the third and fourth War of the Worlds.
Franklin Harris|7.17.06 @ 1:41PM|#
"Word War III"??? That's the one where Rock Hudson was president, right?
|7.17.06 @ 1:44PM|#
I have long suspected that Reagan's little joke made in front of
a supposably dead, but actually live microphone ("The missiles have
been launched..") was a calculated ploy in the game of chicken that
was the Cold War. The only way to win a game of chicken is for the
other guy to think you are crazy enough not to back down.
It worked for Ronnie. Gorby allowed the wall to be torn down. If
Bush-lite plays up his shoot first and ask questions later cowboy
image, he could get Syria to pull back their trained dogs.
|7.17.06 @ 1:59PM|#
Provided, of course, that they understand that it's not
Istanbul, it's Constantinople.
Why did Constantinople get the works?
|7.17.06 @ 2:07PM|#
P Brooks,
The French and Indian war was part of the Seven Years' War, or vice
versa (the former was a little longer than the latter).
|7.17.06 @ 2:36PM|#
If he knew the mic was on, then it may have been a clever bit of
theatre to get the Iranians to relax a bit.
If he didn't, it is disheartening to think that he thinks the buck
stops with syria and not Iran.
Eitherway, don't talk with you mouth full. Especially in a room
full of cameras.
And I for one want to see this sweater that blair supposedly picked
out for Bush, i thought that was Condi's job.
|7.17.06 @ 2:40PM|#
What's really funny is that CNN is playing the clip unedited,
with a newscaster repeating the president's comment for good
measure:
http://www.youtube.com/v/vwS86Oaemh8
I guess the newsworthiness of presidential pronouncements, even
those (alledgedly) not intended for public consumption, supersede
the usual language restrictions.
|7.17.06 @ 3:08PM|#
Ken, Phileleutherus Lipsiensis
Actually, I think it's WWVII, if you count the 30 years war and the
100 years war.
|7.17.06 @ 3:16PM|#
Until every country on the planet joins in a
warfare-filled extravaganza, I refuse to accept that we've actually
had a "World War". Oooh, ten countries from diverse continents were
in a war--why, it must be a "World" War! No, not really.
Don't even bother me until we have at least two hundred
nation-states shooting at each other. Then, maybe, we can talk.
F'in Librul|7.17.06 @ 3:24PM|#
terrorist donkey-raping motherf*ckers
I think you meant donkey-raping sh*teaters.
As a southerner who was taught table manners, I'm less horrified by
the expletive coming out of the president's mouth than by the fact
that he chews with his mouth open and that he speaks while chewing,
tossing food into his mouth as if it's some sort of garbage
disposal.
R C Dean|7.17.06 @ 4:05PM|#
which, I maintain, is against terrorism rather than
fundamentalist Islam.
An academic distinction until fundamentalist Muslims do something
about the terrorists acting in their name.
|7.17.06 @ 4:34PM|#
"An academic distinction until fundamentalist Muslims do
something about the terrorists acting in their name."
Ooh! This looks like a fun game:
1946: An academic distinction until Zionist Jews do something
about the terrorists acting in their name.
1976: An academic distinction until Catholic Northern Irish do
something about the terrorists acting in their name.
1986: An academic distinction until Black South Africans do
something about the terrorists acting in their name.
Play along, kids!
|7.17.06 @ 4:51PM|#
If you count simply geographical spread of the action, any of
the following could as easily be called a world war as WWI (it's
true that Japan fought on the side of the Allies, but their direct
contribution was limited - there was less actual fighting in the
Asian/Pacific theatre in WWI than in most of the conflicts
below)
- Anglo-Spanish conflict (approx 1568-1603)
- Thirty Years War
- War of the League of Augsburg
- War of Spanish Succession
- War of Austrian Succession
- Seven Years' War
- War of American Independence
- Wars of the First through Sixth Coalitions/French Revolutionary
and Napoleonic Wars (note that the War of the Seventh Coalition was
the 'Hundred Days', not enough time for fighting to spread beyond
Europe)
Now, by PL's definition, WWII is the only reasonable candidate;
technically, most of the world outside the main antagonists was
either co-belligerent, a colony of a belligerent power, or
occupied, even if the Americas, most of Africa, and large chunks of
Asia were never the site of any actual fighting. (Historical trivia
for the day : did you know that a Brazilian Expeditionary Force
fought with the Allies in Italy?)
VM|7.17.06 @ 4:52PM|#
2006: an academic distinction until Stevo gets the zipper to
his Bertrand Russell costume fixed, thereby enabling some naughty
snugglebunnies to take place with the blow-up Noam Chomsky
doll.
2006: an academic distinction until the lusty coeds act out
the sweaty pillow fight scene on page 69 (from the leatherbound
verion of "Heather has two Mommies").
2006 an academic distinction until Mr. Steven Crane returns to
drench us in more owl-related hilarity and mirth.
you're right! it's a lot of fun! :)
(pours second drink of the afternoon)
|7.17.06 @ 5:47PM|#
Point out which war after 1945 was fought with sticks and rocks
and I'll show you WWIV.
/too obscure?
|7.17.06 @ 6:19PM|#
Is it just me, or is simply fascinating to hear the two most powerful men in the world caught in a candid moment talking war and peace?
|7.17.06 @ 6:55PM|#
It's amazing that the president saying "shit" is considered to be headline news.
|7.17.06 @ 6:58PM|#
To bad Bush-lite didn't follow up his remark with "And if Kim Jong Il wants nukular weapons so bad, maybe we should send him some."
|7.17.06 @ 7:02PM|#
Is the FCC going to fine Dubya now? I think the current maximum fine for saying naughty words is $500,000.
|7.17.06 @ 10:26PM|#
Thanks VM!
I didn't know that Depeche Mode did a cover of Route 66. I'll
listen to it. I really like DM. And interesting...The lyrics given
for the DM cover do indeed say: "If you get hip to this
kind of trip And go take that california trip"
While the lyrics given for the Stones cover are: "Would you
get hip to this kindly tip
And go take that california trip"
In common parlance, I always say: "hep to the trip" as in "Are you
hep?" Maybe I'll change it to "hip to the trip." Whatdya
think?
Rock on, VM!
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245