1 Just goes to prove a theory I've always held dear ... that booze-soaked war apologists can be well-spoken if not well reasoned.

2 Good Lt.,
Hitchens is also one of  "the most eloquent and knowledgeable of all" anti-Mullah anti-Islamic-Republic people, my disagreement with his atheistic views notwithstanding. :-)

3 Yes - we all know that noted war critics like Sean Penn and Ted Kennedy are models of sobriety, integrity, historical context and rhetorical flourish. Rosie O'Donnell is a scholar and a professor of linguistics, as is Michael Moore and Markos "Screw them" Moulitsas Zuniga.

Nice ad hominem, though. Really, it was. Can't argue with the substance of the point, attack the messenger.

4 Garduneh,

You probably already knew this but I didn't.  Christopher has a brother, Peter, who is a Christian opposed to the war.  I guess they have publicly debated about faith on occasion.  I read an article by Peter a few days ago reviewing his brother's book God Is Not Great.  Hopefully, they can convert each other.

5 I would have though you could have come up with a stronger way to defend your opinions of Hitchens than pointing out that others are booze-soaked as well.

Even so, does nothing to alter the fact that he's a booze-soaked aplogist who's reasoning has been shot down umpteen times in the recent past, by better than himself-- rhetorical flourishes not withstanding.

6 I get the concept of being PWNed,  But call me stupid,  what is its actual definition?  What is the acronym?

7 Free paris Hilton. Save her from low classed poor beggers. Judge going to lose this one.

8 With such powerfull intelectuals on the side of the pro war forces one has to be amazed that the overwhelming majority of Americans no longer can support the war.

9 "John Ryan" (a.k.a. Mullahcracy's mouth piece)
Your Mo-slime kind cann't help being pathetic sore loser, can you?
 heh heh heh heh :->>

And "Sharm",
Nice job exposing yourself as a Mullahcracy agent!
It won't be long now before you and "John Ryan" Qolam-Ali Tazi  your benefactors are disposed of and you'll lose your source of  income. Heh heh heh heh :->>

10 birdhurd -

"pwned" is a humorous and intentional misspelling of the word "owned."

See more here, from the Urban Dictionary.

b-

a booze-soaked aplogist (sic)

...who regularly rends your tiny-minded leftwing bullsh*t eight ways from Sunday while you try to ignore him. You can't argue with his logic without defending/rationalizing/excusing Islamic murderers, Islamic terrorists and Islamic war on the West.

Did you catch him wreaking complete and utter pwnage on one of the "intellectuals" you no doubt think "shoots down his reasoning?" The scrub is so devastated at the end of this debate that he is rendered speechless. Go ahead - watch it.

who's reasoning has been shot down umpteen times in the recent past, by better than himself

By who, exactly? Keith Olberloon?

His reasoning, based entirely on irrefutable historical fact, international law and a working knowledge (as opposed to an emotion) of modern world history, UN and NATO resolutions,

Cite one fact he got wrong.

11 Thank you very much Mr Good Lt.
 
I f I see ya around town , I'll buy you a beer.  Im in the Philly area too.

12 Garduneh,

I think you read my conversion comment the opposite was intended.  I meant that Christopher could convert Peter on the war and Peter could convert him to Christianity.  I didn't realize the opposite effect.

13 birdhurd -

Deal.

14 "...the overwhelming majority of Americans no longer can support the war."

It's such an "overwhelming" majority that the Dems (who were allegedly elected to stop the war) can't bring themselves to stop funding the war, LOL.

15 Hitchens is as always, excellent at dealing with tangible realities.  Thanks for posting this!                      USA, all the way!

16 Mehr I am a buddhist not a muslim have been for over 40 years.

My main source of income his forestry management, although there is a corelation between that and the surge in oil prices it doesn't really have an effect on my sense of reality

The heh heh heh laughter at your own wit must be a carry over from a different culture.

17

When you meet Buddha on the road do you kill him?         

                                         USA, all the way!

18 When is the Jawa going to get serious about more important issues? Have you not heard of the Pwning of Pwris?!? I demand action!

19 >>>>> ..who regularly rends your tiny-minded leftwing bullsh*t eight ways from Sunday while you try to ignore him.

Not true at all as far as I’m concerned. He rarely says anything I haven’t heard before. He just repackages it in a Buckleyesque tone that sounds good to the uninformed.

>>>>>>> You can't argue with his logic without defending/rationalizing/excusing Islamic murderers, Islamic terrorists and Islamic war on the West.

Yes, I can. We have no right, no duty, no legal or moral high-ground in which to intervene in a nation on anyone’s behalf, especially if it does not serve our national interest. We went in to Iraq almost, repeat almost, solely on the basis of our national interest — not under the auspices of a humanitarian mission as was stated in Somalia and Kosovo, but as a protection from WMD, “mushroom clouds” and a rogue regime.

Since that time, the threat was deemed not as great as originally thought. Slowly, but with great care, the rationale morphed into this great humanitarian effort against a genocidal dictator, with the “spreading of democracy” as an added corollary. This transparent effort has been aided by water-carriers like Hitchens and to a minuscule degree, fellows like yourself. Meanwhile, the Iraq War has become al-Queda’s recruiting tool of choice. It’s not about defending, rationalizing, or excusing Islamic extremists; their acts speak for themselves. As far as the civilian populace goes—you know, the ones we’re there for—we’ve traded in Saddam Hussein for the Islamic Army and al-Queda It’s about what the US can truly expect to effect as an outcome just because we have a large standing military.

>>>>>>> By who, exactly? Keith Olberloon?

Puh-lease. Hitchens gets regularly spanked by Ian Parker of the New Yorker (one article entitled "How did Hitchens become a 'Lying, Self-Serving, Fat-Assed, Chain-Smoking, Drunken, Opportunistic, Cynical Contrarian' is a favorite) and Peter Beinart called him a “a former pinko who has become the master of misdirection and the straw man argument in service of the right.”

>>>>>> His reasoning, based entirely on irrefutable historical fact ... cite one fact he got wrong.

Hitchens rarely gets his facts wrong; he's not fool enough to make that mistake publicly. But so what: it's the conclusions he draws from those facts that are almost always flawed, hopelessly optimistic and ill-reasoned.

Case in point, in late 1994-early '95, Hitchens position was this:

"I think that the United States and coalition forces are not militarily defeatable in Iraq .... Unless the United States chooses to be defeated in Iraq, it cannot be. Therefore, the insurgency, so-called, will be defeated."

That turned out to be not true these two-and-a-half years later. His facts are correct, the US cannot be defeated militarily. That is a foregone conclusion and I didn't need Christopher Hitchens to tell me that the world's foremost military arsenal could not be defeated by insurgents. But as others voices have said since before the invasion and Supreme Commander David Petraeus had made a point of most recently, this war cannot and will never be won militarily. It will be won, if at all, politically. So Hitchens fact that we cannot LOSE militarily is irrelevant in a war that cannot be WON militarily.

20 Pwris?! here ya go! With my complements!   
           http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k66epna2Sss&NR=1                                   USA, all the way!

21

tbone, I have to partly agree with you.  I think the war is an important issue, but the only battle that I feel can't be 'won' is trying to reason with people who are totally entrenched in DOGMA.  I don't think you one of those, so your OK                     

                                   USA, all the way!

22 M.W. Thanks, you're not so bad yourself (lot of love today on the Jawa, GR must be getting ready to go out on the boat) and that video was priceless!

23 Mehr I am a buddhist

Of course you are.  Why am I not surprised.  It's the "hip" religion to be, and Libturds are oh so hip.  LOL.

24 "the most eloquent and knowledgeable of all Iraq war supporters."

An eloquent fool is still a fool.

25 I particularly liked the part where Jimmy the peanut farmers stupidity in the Iraq/Iran war in exposed.
 
 
 
 
B: Jerkoff. How do you know the war cannot be won militarily? We haven't made any attempt to solve it militarily. We are posing as cops in a silly police action which does little but keep the enemy busy attempting to kill our troops driving around the country. Iraq could be brought under control if we really put the hammer down. But is that what we really want?

26

Tbone: Greyrooster has been out fishing for several days. Got back yesterday PM. Are you two going to start sending valentines to each other.

 

 

 

 

FREE PARIS AND OUTLAW ISLAM

27 How do you know the war cannot be won militarily?

Because hundreds of military and foreign policy experts--including David Petreaus--, commander of ALL forces in Iraq, SAY publicly it cannot be won militarily. But maybe they should be calling a putz like you to get the real story.

We haven't made any attempt to solve it militarily.

What, oh, what in the fuck are you talking about you muddle-headed idiot?