1.
Half a league, half a league,
Half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.
"Forward, the Light Brigade!
"Charge for the guns!" he said:
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.
2.
"Forward, the Light Brigade!"
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'd:
Their's not to make reply,
Their's not to reason why,
Their's but to do and die:
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.
38 comments:
Bernie, I just noticed that you have Lehigh Valley Common Sense listed under the "dark side" category, and with a ? at the end. That's the funniest thing I've seen all night (not including the State of the Union). Well played.
Bush was far too conciliatory towards the Dems. He should have remained the President we re elected in 2004.
Bernie,
Our troops are going to get slaughtered? Really? I hate to sound callous but 3000 + casualties in 4 years usually indicates a well planned out war!
NO END BUT VICTORY!
Julian, It's the best speech I ever heard Bush deliver. But when he spoke about Iraq, Tennyson's verse began to reverberate inside that space between my ears. It's not that the troops will be slaughtered. It's the futility that gets to me.
The best speeches President ever gave were the Axis of Evil speech (http://www.c-span.org/executive/transcript.asp?cat=current_event&code=bush_admin&year=2002) and the "You're either with us or you're against us" speech which unfortunatly I can't find the text of just now.
Liberating 25 million people? Oh yeah, that's futile.
No personal offense intended of course I just think you're wrong.
Julian, It's funny. Those speeches are among Bush's worst, and went a long way to help our negative image in the rest of the world. Bush himself has openly stated he regrets using phrases like "Bring it on." And Julian, despite my brilliant arguments, the Prez isn't listening to me on this one. Over 20,000 troops are on their way to Iraq. So to be honest, I'll tell you that I hope I am wrong.
I don't think he was "too conciliatory" at all.
I think he still spoke with some authority and, whether we like it or not, we do need to all work together. I hope both sides realize this. It seems everybody is buddy-buddy during the SOTU and claps and smiles and hugs permeate the chamber but as soon as it's over, it always seems to be "us vs them" again; regardless of who is in the White House and who controls Congress.
I also wish they would just hold all applause until the end. It's really annoying if you ask me.
Brian, You got that right. Most of these guys are sticking knives in Bush. It's too phony to applaud him left and right. It's like a ritual. It's starting to remind me of mass.
I have a late start on the papers today because I wrote late last night, but I'll say again that it's the best speech I ever heard Bush deliver. He showed a little humility, but not in a demeaning way. And he had some good ideas that both left and right can embrace, like his proposal to reduce gasoline consumption by 20%.
I really feel his proposal in Iraq is an exercise in futility, but I hope I'm wrong and that he pulls his off. I say that, not for his sake, but ours.
I find your inference of the "light Brigade" ironic. Our troops don't have enough equipment to fight, and /or protect themselves.
Bush is the "Great Prevaricator." I just can't believe anything Dick Cheneys talking doll says. I wish it were true and sincere, but after 6 years, a liar is a liar. I watched Jim webb's speech afterwards. wow! where did the Dems get this guy? Oh, that's right, he used to be a Republican!
Last night, as I listened to him speak, I began to grasp his understanding of foreign policy. I'll read the transcript to see if I'm mistaken. But I'll tell you now that my impression is that Bush's foreign policy may be a radical departure from that of his predecessors.
During Clinton's years in office, the genocide in Rwanda occurred, and the US did nothing. It wouldn't even call it a genocide. I remember one night a network had a report about the machete massacres, and I could hear the death screams of children in the background. That's when I stopped watching TV. I was totally disgusted. I still have nightmares about that.
To his credit, Bush has spoken out against what is going on in Darfur, and had no problem calling it a genocide. He also spoke with conviction about the tragicv abuse of human rights in faraway places like Burma, which have no strategic interest to the US. And the US has used the UN to put pressure on tyhe government in Burma and Darfur.
He may genuinely believe that the US has an obligation to take a stand against human rights abuses, even in areas where we have no vital interests.
If this is so, that's a good thing in many ways. I don't think we can force morality on other countries, but our own morality should cry out against the senseless slaughter of children.
This is just one impression I had listening to Bush. I may be completely full of it, as usual. But if my understanding is close to being right, it's a radically different foreign policy from anything we've seen before. And it explains some of his insistence in Iraq. Unfortunately, I think the measure he has taken will lead precisely to what he most despises - genocide. In this case it will be Sunni Muslims.
So that people do not take my opinions too seriously, I need to disclose that my own military service was that of an enlisted man in an artillery unit. I never saw a day of combat, and was so bad as a gun chief that my unit once destroyed a forward observer's tower and another time destroyed an outhouse nowhere near the fire zone. My entire division was kicked out of Virginia thanks to my great firing skills.
I wonder will we do this the same way the Bush adm has lower the deficit by simply not recording certain gas usage as gas usage oh yes I forgot it's not really his problem since he really doesn't have to do anything since he's out of office in 2 years
Now that we have a Democratic Congress, Bush will not be able to play games with the deficit unless Dems become willing participants.
Was nice to actually see & hear Dubya speak without tripping over three & four syllabal words for once (though he still says "nucular").
I never saw so many old white guys with red noses, though...what's up with that?
I did watch last night's address. As I explained, I don't watch TV (excepting 39 and 69). But last night I was at a friend's home for the address and saw exactly what you mean. Many of those smiles were downright scary. They looked a lot more like leers. And what the hell was Cheney popping in his mouth?
Bernie, Bush's lips were moving, you heard his voice, but Cheney was running the controls in his back!-Chris Casey
We need Julian's fighting spirit on the front lines kicking ass and taking names, not back here safe and sound bloggin with Bernie.
I know that Julian is going to do the right thing and enlist immediately in the Marines so he can get busy liberating a few of those Iraqis himself.
Anon,
Use your real name first and then backhandedly attack me for cowardice
That is all.
I should ad that I don't give a flying monkey turd about what the rest of the world thinks of us.
Three words "bippy".
Bring It On!
Julian's a self-proclaimed chickenhawk. He's hunkered down in the safety of the blogosphere, where he callously proclaims the deaths of 3000+ young American heroes is simply acceptable. What a puss.
there was a nobility to kipling (if you don't count his seething hatred of the Irish) that Bush lacks. And Bush ain't no errol flynn, either.
"That is all." Who are you -- Captain Queeg? Are you going to start using the royal "we" next?
Let's be absolutely clear about something, I wasn't backhandedly attacking you for your cowardice -- I am being very upfront and in your face about your cowardice.
If you think this is a war that will determine the fate of our society then join up. If you think that this is a war of liberation to set 25 million innocent people free then join up. If you really think that 3000 lost American lives isn't to high a price to pay then take your chances and join up.
Otherwise -- either tone down your rhetoric or just shut up.
NO END BUT COWARDICE!
Julian Stoltz
Captain Queeg
Bernie, your point about Bush seeing a role for the US in the world as a sort of "world police" is somewhat troubling. Personally, I don't think any country stands on a moral plateau that affords it that title. It's easy to point to genecide and AIDS. There, I say it's an obligation of a human being (and I recognize that Clinton didn't do so well at it in Africa, but when he brought it up in Europe, it was "Wag the Dog").
There is a place in the world for somebody to play world police. I just don't think one country is that somebody.
Julian, I am concerned about one comment that you made regarding Bush being too conciliatory toward Dems. If you don't find it appropriate for somebody to work with the MAJORITY party in Congress, that tells me that you are find with unilateral government activity. I will never support a candidate (and will frankly work against a candidate) who sees that as appropriate behavior.
Anon,
Sorry if the tone was a little...much? But seriously before you call me a coward for not joining an all volunteer service, kindly use your real name and spell mine correctly. We were too poor to afford the second T ;)
LV,
I have no problem with the President and Congress working together in a bipartisan manner. I, as you know, think it's important for both sides to have a dialogue. I don't like the fact that he was so nice to folks like Dennis Kucinich (and for that matter Ms. Pelosi) who have done nothing but call President Bush a war criminal and an idiot for the last 6 years. I liked the In Your Face Bush that I helped re elect in 04 not the broken shell of a man we see now. As my better half put it "I'd rather have a president with a spine than one I agree with" (she's a dem).
Anon 3:38, The "Charge of the Light Brigade" was penned by Alfred Tennyson, who had an English birth but an Irish soul.
Pelosi called it like it is when it comes to Bush...he is an idiotic chickenhawk of a war criminal.
Maybe if you, Julian Stolz, knew the names of our 3000+ military dead, who are no doubt anonymous to you, you'd be less concerned with anonymity & far more concerned with getting us the hell out of that quagmire in Iraq that you so flippantly seem to think is such a noble cause & for which you hide behind the banner of volunteerism to avoid.
Julian,
It's no secret you desire to serve in politics. You have very strong feelings about the war, and you're young. And I appreciate your comments. But I think the question is a fair one. Given your strong beliefs, why aren't you serving in the military? Do you intend to enlist when you complete college? Is there some physical reason why you can't serve? I don't believe you'll have much credibility in politics if you can't answer that question.
I know you're still quite young. In my eyes, you're still a baby. And the last thing I'd want you to do is run out and enlist just to show us that you're not, as you were called, a chickenhawk. But it's a fair question, especially in view of some of the strident statments you made. 3,000 casualties being evidence of a well-planned war? A humbled Bush is "too conciliatory?" You prefer a prez who alienated the rest of the world with "Bring it on?"
As far as the post being anonymopus is concerned, that's my call. I think the comments are almost always better than my posts, and I let people comment anonymously because there are some who have things to say who could not otherwise comment. My blog, my rules. It's pretty wide open here.
I'd appreciate an answer to the question, and not the flippant one you gave yesterday.
"Concerning one of your comments, you now claim that Bush is motivated by moral considerations in foreign policy. How do you square that with your previous (correct) observation that it is 'about the oil'?"
******************************
FtHillDem,
I believe it is all about the oil. I know that's why we're there, and I have links in that posts to Bush making precisely that statement. And I probably should not have posted my remarks about my concept of Bush foreign policy. I want to read what he said and do a little research. But my impression last night was that this guy believes moral principles should dictate foreign policy. My thinking is undeveloped, as I pointed out, and is probably flawed, as you make rather clear.
LVDem,
Yes, your points are very well taken. The US cannot and should not be the world police. At the same time, we should not turn a blind eye to the senseless slaughter of children. That business in Rwanda really affected me.
As I said in my comment and confessed to FtHillDem, my thinking about Bush's foreign policy is completely undeveloped. Logically, it's stupid for me to try to deduce his foreign policy based on a few minutes of one speech. But I sometimes go off on tangents like that. I do like the remarks about Darfur and Burma, and like even more that the US has been applying pressures to resolve those situations in the UN.
I'm going to research this matter a little more. It really intrigues me. There's no doubt in my mind that Cheney is simplyt an imperialist. But Bush seems to be a crusader. That can be just as bad, too. But in some instances, it can be good, at least if it is approached in the right way.
Bernie and anyone else who brings it up,
It just isn't my calling nor what I desire to do. If there were ever a draft I'd enlist promptly because clearly my country would truly need the service of everyone, otherwise, I tend to buck authority a little too much and ask too many questions (just ask the Lehigh GOP establishment) to be in the military in a time period where the United States is not immediately in danger.
I hope that suffices?
Julian, As I understand your answer, you have problems taking orders (don't we all?) but would serve if the US were in danger. That's a reasonable answer, but it begs another question. As Bush has said as recently as last night, the only reason we are there is because we are in danger from a group that hates everything about the American way of life. And if we don't take it to them, they'll invade. The best defense is a good offense and so on. You said it yourself. "This is a mission we can't afford to lose." If this is the way you truly feel, then you do believe we are in imminent danger. By your own reasoning, shouldn't you therefore enlist? And if we aren't in danger, then why the hell did we invade?
You'd "enlist" in a "draft," where you have no choice 'cause...well...you'd be drafted. But you refuse to enlist as a volunteer, which is what volunteerism is all about.
Stolz, you talk outa both sides of your mouth & your ass, which I believe in your case may be one & the same orifice.
You say "the United States is not immediately in danger." Apparently Bernies right & you are a baby...or at least a very gifted toddler under the age of five, who doesn't recall the events of September 11, 2001 & the thwarted attempts to wreck havoc here in the U.S. in the years since then.
Dude you'd never make it through boot camp, let alone a tour of duty ANYWHERE.
Bernie,
We can't afford to lose but the problem isn't the amount of resources or the amount of soldiers in our military. It's the media dragging out bad news day after day and ignoring the good (like schools being built, elections being held, shias not being gassed and/or deprived of water). Also we need to stop fighting a PC war (as I said the other day) get the media out and let our boys do their thing without being second guessed.
Uncle Sam,
at the very least I'll grant you that last comment. I wouldn't survive bootcamp hence me not joining the Military. The men who do are better than I and I admit it freely
Julian,
I appreciate your answers. I'm going to drop this, but my own view is that you're wide open. This refusal to serve, combined with such willingness to accept high American casualties, is a little odd. To make matters worse, you want us to stop being PC, whatever that means. Given your other statements, it seems to mean you're willing to accept a high number of civilian casualties, higher than the 40,000 deaths to Iraq civilians.
I do thank you for your honesty.
As you see Julian is just another Yellow Elephant with a big mouth.Boy Put up or shut up.
Yeah...its the media dragging out bad news that's turned this war into a fiasco. What the f#@k kinda rationale is that?!?! U b livin' in some sorta Republican Candyland, Stolz.
And what the f#@k is this PC war you keep referring to? A personal computer war? Hell that's the only war you've got any balls to engage in!
The yellow elephants of the Lehigh Valley now have an option. Bush proposed a "Civilian Corps", or as I like to think of it "Civilian Corpses."
I hate to jump on someone when they are down, but as a U.S. army veteran, I get to tell the chickenhawks of the fightin 82nd desktops to shut the f**K up.
I don't wallow in self pity or self righteousness because my left arm has a screw for an elbow, or that the freakin arthritis I have at 45 from all the injured joints and broken bones sucks.
I made my choice, and I live with it. I VOLUNTEERED. The troops in Iraq went there on a lie, served up to us by the great prevaricator and his toadies.
Big freakin' difference between Iraq and Afghanistan, bippies.
Julian, do yourself a favor and stop talking. You are wrong. I don't often crush debate, but you are wrong!
Post a Comment