There's not much to like in Michael Tomasky's hawkish column about Syria in The Daily Beast today, but I appreciated this burst of candor at the end:
Yes, an American attack might escalate matters. But it also might not. We got in and out of Libya. It's not clear what that one accomplished yet, although we did presumably prevent a slaughter of many thousands in Benghazi.
"Presumably." When this is the case for war, you know that popular momentum is on the doves' side.
Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com
posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary
period.
Subscribe
here to preserve your ability to comment. Your
Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the
digital
edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do
not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments
do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and
ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Tomaskey is the troll who admitted he would have whined about Mitt Romney not speaking to the NAACP during the election and did complain when he did speak to them. The man would support Obama raping nuns if he made a pretty speech about it.
Jesse, if I didn't know better I would almost think that you didn't
implicitly trust the Obama Administration to make the best decisions about your life and the lives of the people in Syria.
Come on you guys, if the president doesn't act he looks a pussy. We can't have the first blackish POTUS look like a pussy. It might even help or at least not hurt.
Come on you guys, if the president doesn't act he looks a pussy. We can't have the first blackish POTUS look like a pussy. It might even help or at least not hurt.
So that's a good enough reason to waste treasure, influence, credibility and lives?
Christ what an idiot.
Couldn't you just as easily say "we didn't presumably do anything to help the situation in Libya". I mean shit, it's not like you can prove it or anything. Oh, wait. Tomasky must have a time machine to parallel Earth.
What are you talking about. Clearly we have a compelling reason. They are killing people. We have to show them that killing people is wrong. How do we do this? By killing people.
If we kill them then they deserve it because we wouldn't kill them unless they deserved it.
Kinda like when the police hospitalize or kill someone then the person deserved it because the cop wouldn't have beaten them if they didn't deserve it.
When you have the power to initiate violence without consequence, you also have the power to employ circular reasoning.
Okay, I understand it. So an unkilled unit of potential targeting exists in a state of superposition, simultaneously deserving of death and not deserving of death, until we kill the unit of potential targeting, in which case, by the act of measuring/killing, we can observe that it, in fact, deserved to die.
So we have to kill it to know whether it deserved it.
We know the rich don't pay their fair share by the fact that they're rich, and we know that dead targets deserved to die by the fact that they're dead.
I have not read Tomaskey since he left the Guardian, but independent of any political belief I may or not hold, Tomaskey is the most shameless propagandist since you know who. Tomaskey would make Magda wet.
I used to read Tomaskey articles in the Guardian for the same reason I watch Joel what's-his-name on TV - for a laugh.
Tomaskey is the troll who admitted he would have whined about Mitt Romney not speaking to the NAACP during the election and did complain when he did speak to them. The man would support Obama raping nuns if he made a pretty speech about it.
Would he need the speech? I imagine, like Friedman, he'd write his own speech that Obama ought to present about why nuns need to be raped.
I believe it was Ghandi who accurately said, "kill them all, let God sort it out".. Or maybe it was some other Nobel Peace Prize recipient.
You can imagine the behind the scenes calls going out: "Barack's credibility is on the line here, you have GOT to support him."
"Indeed, it's on the RED line."
Sorry, due to Barack Obama's credibility shuttle buses will be provided between RI Ave. and Ft. Totten.
Is that still going on? At least this time the Red Line had the decency to derail an empty train instead of one full of rush hour commuters.
So toss in some explosives, shake stuff up, hope for the best. Best plan ever.
"Can you prove it won't work? I rest my case."
But not too much explosives, that would ruin the recipe.
Five hedging words in two sentences. Impressive.
Jesse, if I didn't know better I would almost think that you didn't
implicitly trust the Obama Administration to make the best decisions about your life and the lives of the people in Syria.
Yes it is suspicious.
If you see something, say something.
Is AttackWatch still up?
although we did presumably prevent a slaughter of many thousands in Benghazi.
What difference, at this point, does it make?
Let's. Get. Dangerous.
OPERATION URGENT CREDIBILITY
We need to make this one official.
Come on you guys, if the president doesn't act he looks a pussy. We can't have the first blackish POTUS look like a pussy. It might even help or at least not hurt.
Come on you guys, if the president doesn't act he looks a pussy. We can't have the first blackish POTUS look like a pussy. It might even help or at least not hurt.
Fucking squirrels.
Bomb them, too.
The squirrelz have mocked you. You must Tomahawk them or they will feel free to squirrel you in the future.
"Presumably"???
So that's a good enough reason to waste treasure, influence, credibility and lives?
Christ what an idiot.
Couldn't you just as easily say "we didn't presumably do anything to help the situation in Libya". I mean shit, it's not like you can prove it or anything. Oh, wait. Tomasky must have a time machine to parallel Earth.
Call me crazy, but I think we should have a compelling reason for killing people before we start killing people. A really compelling reason.
There's clearly no such thing here.
Crazy!
I think Tomasky's column is a pretty compelling reason to kill at least one person.
What are you talking about. Clearly we have a compelling reason. They are killing people. We have to show them that killing people is wrong. How do we do this? By killing people.
Killing the same people or different people? Or some of each? Just which side are we on again?
We will kill the people who deserve to be killed because the people we kill will have deserved it.
They deserve it after we kill them, then? So this is some sort of observer-based morality?
If we kill them then they deserve it because we wouldn't kill them unless they deserved it.
Kinda like when the police hospitalize or kill someone then the person deserved it because the cop wouldn't have beaten them if they didn't deserve it.
When you have the power to initiate violence without consequence, you also have the power to employ circular reasoning.
Why? Fuck you. That's why.
Okay, I understand it. So an unkilled unit of potential targeting exists in a state of superposition, simultaneously deserving of death and not deserving of death, until we kill the unit of potential targeting, in which case, by the act of measuring/killing, we can observe that it, in fact, deserved to die.
So we have to kill it to know whether it deserved it.
We know the rich don't pay their fair share by the fact that they're rich, and we know that dead targets deserved to die by the fact that they're dead.
Say, why aren't we drone-murdering the rich? Is Obama not really one of the people?
He has that little portal generator from Sliders!! It must be a new iPhone app.
"Hey, this might not result in WWIII, tens of thousands of casualties, and Trillions of dollars wasted! So let's go for it!"
Tomasky's argument is akin to the dilemma of whether to order the soup from the deli.
In his case, whether to order soup from the deli, but flamethrowing the waiter, whether he orders the soup or not.
What fancy delis do they have in Florida what have waiters?
Right off the top of my head, Jason's Deli has people bring out your food.
For legal purposes, the state of Florida defines a person as any human, alligator, or snake that is at least five feet long.
Mr. Dunderbak's, too. That's a deli with waiters.
TooJays
I have not read Tomaskey since he left the Guardian, but independent of any political belief I may or not hold, Tomaskey is the most shameless propagandist since you know who. Tomaskey would make Magda wet.
I used to read Tomaskey articles in the Guardian for the same reason I watch Joel what's-his-name on TV - for a laugh.
These guys are basically just wandering around the control room fucking with stuff and asking, "What does THIS button do?"
Best description of the current administration ever penned!
That's a deli with waiters
Do they serve argument, or just abuse?
I respectfully submit as the most odious argument for war you'll hear:
http://tinyurl.com/mccjq4p
no surprise really, but just read it, it's disgusting.
Sep 16, 2013, Vol. 19, No. 02 ? By WILLIAM KRISTOL
"Sep 16", eh?
Not only disgusting, but time-traveling as well.
We got in and out of Libya.
Is that the same "days, not weeks" Libya of which I'm thinking? It can't be.