Go Home

Bill Kristol gets a war boner

One of the many depressing aspects of Obama's horrific decision to start a third simultaneous war with a Muslim-majority nation is that it's providing endless pangs of pleasure to Bill Kristol. After all, America's Chickenhawk-in-Chief hasn't been able to watch other people risk their asses invading a sovereign country since 2003 and he's just as thrilled and excited about this latest adventure as you'd expect him to be:

And so, despite his doubts and dithering, President Obama is taking us to war in another Muslim country. Good for him.

No, seriously. That's how Kristol actually starts out his column. Read it again:

And so, despite his doubts and dithering, President Obama is taking us to war in another Muslim country. Good for him.

It's hard for most of us to comprehend the sort of vile vampiric scumbag who relishes the thought of having his country go to war in three different countries at the same time, but that's pretty much how Bill Kristol rolls. I wonder what would happen if America successfully invaded the entire world -- whatever would Kristol do to pleasure himself? Perhaps he'd recommend sending our entire army into the depths of the Pacific Ocean to launch a long-overdue war against the lost city of Atlantis. Those shifty Mermen have had it coming for a long time, after all.

More:

The president didn’t want this. He’s been so unhappy about such a possibility—so fearful of such an eventuality—that first he tied himself in knots trying to do nothing. Then he decided that, if he had to act, it would be good to boast that he was merely following the Arab League and subordinating American action to the U.N. Security Council. After all, nothing—nothing!—could be worse than the perception that the United States was “invading” another Muslim country.

Yeah, where the hell did we get this stigma about "invading" Muslim countries from? It's not like anyone's ever died from such "invasions" before. Why, you'd think it was as bad as trying to give people health insurance!

In all seriousness, Kristol is just happy to be starting another war, since apparently the Afghanistan conflict has gotten so BOE-RING! The one downer for him is that Obama bothered to get the UN's permission to attack Libya rather than going all in and giving other countries the finger like Bush did. Kristol is at his absolute happiest when our country is both at war and defying the will of the international community. But he'll happily take the war all the same.

Rubbish. Our “invasions” have in fact been liberations.

They have liberated many people from their lives, yes.

We have shed blood and expended treasure in Kuwait in 1991, in the Balkans later in the 1990s, and in Afghanistan and Iraq—in our own national interest, of course, but also to protect Muslim peoples and help them free themselves. Libya will be America’s fifth war of Muslim liberation.

It's amazing that after five glorious wars, the Middle East isn't yet a mecca of sunshine, lollipops, rainbows and everything that's wonderful that I feel when we're together. But of course, there's always the option of starting a sixth war, which I'm sure will make everything better.

[T]he Reagan tradition—indeed, the Reagan-Bush-Dole-Bush-McCain tradition—in foreign policy isn’t a burden to be borne. It’s a tradition to be proud of. It’s rare that a political party gets to stand for more than a partial interest, for more than a limited point of view. It’s rare that a political party gets to stand for the national interest, for national greatness, for the exceptional American role in the liberation of peoples around the globe.

I'm amazed that Kristol can't type this crap without God coming down from the heavens, striking Kristol down with all manner of lightning and saying, "I didst err when I made thee, vile spawn of darkness!" In case Bill hasn't noticed, we're facing massive cuts to public education, to social safety net programs and even to services as basic as public street lights. And yet Kristol thinks we should sacrifice all of these things on his bloody altar of permanent warfare.

Thanks for aiding his agenda, Obama!

Share This Post

Link To This Post


55 Comments
dadams's picture

there doesn't appear to be any separation of powers in
washington dc any more. who the hell is really running
our government?

MacJr's picture

Least of all "we them damn people". Everyone's playing defense.


Humpty Dumpty was pushed.

Rich H's picture

Israeli forces go north while U.S. forces in Iraq go NW to meet and crush Syria.
Jordan surrenders.
U.S. forces in Iraq go east while U.S. forces in Afghanistan go west to meet and crush Iran.*
The Saudis remain neutral, but at a price, they agree to sell all their oil to the U.S. war machine at a negotiated
1000% of whatever the world market value of oil is.**
Just to make sure those North Africans know who they are dealing with we invade Libya.

*In my dreams, er, nightmares.
** A 20% cut goes to Bush and war profiteers.

I bet this would be a neocon wet dream. When is this going to stop?

Ferrofluid's picture

the last time they invaded Lebanon.

SteKos's picture

Good question.

I wholeheartedly believe that these people WILL NOT STOP on their own. There are no lines in the sand for them, they do whatever they can to make themselves richer and more powerful, without any concern whatsoever for whomever is stepped on.

They WILL NOT STOP. Mindless, limitless greed drives them, and they are winning.

cund_gulag's picture

I thought it was 1/2 a roll of dimes in his front pocket.
I thought it would be bigger than that.
But, I bet that's what all of the boys say.

The only time I'd ever be happy if there's a war, is if Chickenhawks like Kristol, Bush, and Cheney are on the front lines.
But, then, they wouldn't last 2 minutes.
And soldier with a half a brain would frag them before these cowards got everyone else killed.

William Kristol:
Never met a war he didn't want to fight. Unless that war wanted him for the fight.

Anyone remember what this assholes excuse was for not serving during Vietnam?
Was it a boil on his dick?

Ferrofluid's picture

too rich and connected to either be drafted or enlist in 1970.

Karyn's picture

between championing for war and drooling over Palin, the man should be in the Journal of the Medical Association

Rich H's picture

Don't you mean half a stick of licorice?

Ferrofluid's picture

Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, and five if you consider the Philippines if you count the US troops there doing adviser roles for the counter insurgency.

This is how the Roman empire collapsed, the tinpot emperors and senate waged war on too many fronts.

'one more war and we all can go home (rich) by Festivus...'

cpinva's picture

pres. obama didn't waste valuable with the mere formality of asking to approve and fund this latest african continent adventure.

for a constitutional lawyer/instructor, this is a very basic mistake.

Loonie's picture

Bill Kristol never met an Arab he didn't like to drop bombs on.

fiver's picture

By any measure, this is a very small, insignificant issue.


Corruption favors the wealthy.

Ferrofluid's picture

was the 90s, the Soviet Union was no more, all the tin pot regimes that relied on Soviet tech and advisors were struggling to cope with their missing logistics.

But now that we are well into the 21stC, 2nd world countries have adapted and found new avenues of war supplies and new military friends. Witness how we (the West) struggle to defeat the supposedly impoverished Taliban and Iraqi insurgents.

The aging neocons are living in their past, they surround themselves with ex Raygunite warmongers and mistily eyed watch and rewatch Rambo movies.

. . . but he couldn't be "bothered" to get Congressional approval.

Our next Republican President just got a free pass to make war without involving Congress in any way.

'Cause, hey, Obama did it.


Corruption favors the wealthy.

MacJr's picture

5, Congress is as irrelevant as you and I anymore.


Humpty Dumpty was pushed.

dadams's picture

the problem is BUSH did it first and set precedent.
obama has/is doing things that bush did and this is wrong.
i am a lifelong democrat,but i did not give obama carte blanche.

fiver's picture

But even Bush went to Congress to get approval for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Obama didn't even do that.


Corruption favors the wealthy.

ron's picture
But

he failed to get approval from the UN Security Council for the Iraq invasion. Seems like you deliberately left that out.

. . . declare war. The UN Security Council's approval is a good thing, The General Assembly's approval is even better. But the Constitution requires that Congress declares war.

Even George f'n W. Bush made sure he got some congressional stamp of approval before he began a war. Obama has just declared the right to go to war on his own whim.

Is there any principle that shouldn't be sacrificed upon Obama's altar?


Corruption favors the wealthy.

miss_kitty's picture

WWII, the last time was on Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania 5 June, 1942. George Bush lied about what he was going to do and got permission to engage militarily. But there was no declaration of war.

fiver's picture

But there was a joint congressional resolution, the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq of 2002. It wasn't a declaration of war, but it was something.

Obama has dispensed with even that nod to the Constitution. With this precedent - something even George W. Bush didn't try - what's to stop any future president (especially a Republican one) from simply ignoring Congress completely and taking this nation to war?

All that Republican would have to say is "Hey, Obama did it."


Corruption favors the wealthy.

ron's picture

that our far right teabagger controlled congress opinions are better than the rest of the civilized world. Glad to see where you stand on this.

I'm not really sure why this should be so confusing to you, but perhaps this will help.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy_0Y7P4KsE


Corruption favors the wealthy.

calgarylady's picture

Classic!

Thnx, fiver :)

ron's picture

you think a sitcom from the past will help us deal with the issues of today. Did we have a NFZ over Libya back then? I'm pretty sure that Obama wasn't president then.

Edwin's picture

I learned a lot from that video.


far left loon >.<

ron's picture

I'll bet that you learned that fiver is the leader of the herd, he's the one with the bell and if you want to be leader, you have to get your own bell.

I thought that was pretty clear, and the concept pre-dates Sanford and Son by almost two centuries. But apparently you didn't understand, so I thought I'd have some fun - and Grady always cracked me up.

I'm ever so sorry for not giving your pretension of misunderstanding the gravity you feel it deserves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZcEOVt-7SY


Corruption favors the wealthy.

ron's picture

"How does that help to deal with 2011. We know that there hasn't been a declaration of war since 1942 and we have been involved in several wars. The NFZ hasn't been designated as a war yet and Ghadafi was killing his own citizens promising to wipe them out. We are not leading in the NFZ so, even if you disagree with our involvement, do you have a solution? You never offer solutions, you just critisize. I ask again, is there anything Obama's done that you approve of?

Even if you trust Obama to go to war on his own authority (I don't, but you might), do you really want to give this power to every President?

Because all a President Palin (God forbid) would have to do to go to war with Switzerland would be to do it. That's it; that's all. And in response to any complaints that she sidestepped Congress, all President Sh*tferbrains would have to say is "Obama did it; there's bipartisan agreement that the President can go to war on her own."

That scares the heck out of me.


Corruption favors the wealthy.

ron's picture

I missed the part where you had anything positive to say about Obama. I'll look again. Nope, nothing there. Wait a minute, I'll look again. Nope, still nothing. I didn't even see an objection to all the other presidents doing it.

. . . nor is it even remotely related to the topic of War in Libya.

But good luck with that.

Maybe a visit from Desi Arnez Jr. would help. I know he's not Obama, but he really did wonders for Marsha.


Corruption favors the wealthy.

ron's picture

that's where you're wrong again. Obama's not my hero. I havee respect for his position but hardly agree with him on every issue. I'm torn on his decision to get involved with the NFZ but I can understand why he decided to have a limited involvement in it. I can disagree and still show respect, something that you have a hard time dealing with. It woulod be comforting to me if you could name "ONE THING" that you agreed with him on though. You don't have to stoke any hero worship because it doesn't exist.

fiver's picture

But, what the heck, we've been on this board for years together. I'll play it again.

Things I like about Barack Obama:

He's smart, articulate, and isn't an international joke (unlike his predecessor).

Elizabeth Warren.

Student loan reform.

The Lilly Ledbetter Act.

Repeal of DADT.

Having the French and British take more of a lead in this War on Libya.

He's from Chicago (not Kenya, not Hawaii, Chicago).

He's a Bears fan (and just met with the Blackhawks).

His early opposition to the Iraq War.

His ability to truly move a crowd with his passion and appeal to our better natures.

There's probably much more, but those are a few items off the top of my head. I voted for the guy through two elections and volunteered for his campaigns and donated to them in both (though I initially supported Edwards in the presidential primaries until he dropped out).

But I do strongly disagree with the majority of Obama's positions as President (going back before to telecom immunity), and I'll continue to voice that disagreement just as I did when the POS that preceded him was in power.


Corruption favors the wealthy.

ron's picture

it's the 1st time I've seen you mention any of these things. Voted through 2 elections? So you live in Illinois? 1st i've heard that. Oh well.

fiver's picture

Oregon when he ran for President.

Back in Illinois now.


Corruption favors the wealthy.

Edwin's picture

That's how the Pentagon does accounting. (They're not quite that accurate, but you get the idea.)


far left loon >.<

Ape-Man's picture

Wasn't it Kennedy that did it first? in Vietnam? What about Korea?

The president also said he isn't asking congress for funding for the no-fly-zone. He is also arguing that the no-fly-zone action is not really a war. He did tell congress about it. He says he has the law on his side to help the coalition.


"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-

fiver's picture

But once it became - beyond any rational argument - a war, Congress passed The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and the escalation of Vietnam was "on." Again, it wasn't a declaration of war, but at least it was recognition that war was very serious business, and Congress should be involved.

Firing cruise missiles at a country and dropping bombs on it have been Acts of War for as long as there have been bombs and missiles.

It's kinda strange how he doesn't need funding for all of this but supposedly can't move a relative handful of prisoners from Guantanamo prison without congressional funding.


Corruption favors the wealthy.

fitley's picture

It's true lil Billy K. is popping up over this. The last turgid response he had was the Wasilla HoBag so there ya go. And as much as he tries to keep her fake funbag memory alive it is surely fading. He need new inspiration.
You would think the drone killings of Pakistanis would be enough to keep the lead in lil Billy K's pencil, it wasn't.
How sad. Maybe he should go to the airport with Larry Craig to get some pointers on how to keep the excitement going.

mgloraine's picture

...if you want to invade Atlantis, you'd have to target the Atlantic Ocean. That's why it's named "Atlantic".


The lefter I go, the righter I get...

tampa_edski's picture

Kristol seems to be the only blowhard really happy about this (though I must admit I'm trying hard not to pay much attention)...the reaction from left leaning folk seems to be from mild bemusment to horrific shock, yet I keep reading/hearing from the right leaning folk about how happy the lefties are.

Just seems to be that this whole thing has most people confused...the best result I suppose is that we do hand off most responsibility tot he Frenchies and Brits in a few days. Somehow I don't see that working out that way.


not all martyrs see divinity

Different Anonymous's picture
.

Make no mistake, the neos are elated, but they can't let on so that if/when the adventure goes south, they can heap blame onto Obama and the Dems. Nevermind it's what they want to do, the Dems have just provide oh, so convenient cover.

Much like Social Security "reform." They get the destruction, the Dems get the blame. What's not to love about that?

Ape-Man's picture

sounds about right.


"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-

Captain Kangaroo's picture

McCain is the same way as Kristol. He was on Candy (Alister) Crowley telling her that Obama should have gone in earlier. WTF. when did this uprising start? Three weeks ago? When does McCain and Kristol think that Obama should have gone in? And do these asshats know who the opposition are? Al Qaeda has recruited more people from the Benghazi area than any place else in the world. Does McInsane know this? Does Billy the Bloody know this?

Captain Kangaroo's picture

Another fucked up thing is that these asshats just cannot deal with the Unites States being the country not running the show (even though we are running the show). What is wrong with letting some other country running the show and taking the hit? We can't even afford to continue the tsunami warning commission (or whatever the deal is) but we can afford to take the lead in some bullshit Arab half ass war?

cpinva's picture

but unlike pres. obama, he did get a resolution from congress authorizing his "adventures" in both afghanistan & iraq.

how exactly is pres. obama planning to pay for the cost of our war (and that's exactly what it is, when you commit acts of war on other countries) in libya? no funds have been requested or budgeted for it, or is it just going to come out of the regular DoD budget for fy 2010/2011?

there's a reason why the author's gave war making power to congress: they control the purse strings, and have the ability to prevent a president from squandering national treasure and blood, anytime he/she sees fit. this (not unlike afghanistan & iraq) was not an instance of libyan forces attacking us unprovocked, or at all. the last time i checked, UN resolutions, no matter how well meant, do not trump out constitution.

ron's picture

and maybe they could have been called in to reconvene which I think the WH tried, do you really think a republican congress would have said no? You are calling it war, do you think a republican congress would say no? You people have to wake up to the real world.

. . . to call Congress into session. The President simply does it. It's a specified Constitutional power of his.

Article II, Section 3:

. . . he [The President] may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them . . . .

Would a Republican House have said no? In my mind: not a chance. But there could have at least been some debate about what he is getting us into.


Corruption favors the wealthy.

..."war" in the dictionary. deleted by me

Where are the jobs?


Mickey: "It was an epiphany. Do you know what an epipany is?"
Keoni: "NOT NOW MICKEY!"

Rich H's picture

but businesses are still going under all over the place. Some streets you drive down and there's more for rent or for sale signs than their are businesses.

aceshigh's picture

Bill Kristol-nacht is one of the most evil men in the history of this country.

I only wish there was a hell for him to burn in for eternity. What a twisted piece of Zionist shit.


Just 'Cos You Got the Power...THAT DON'T MEAN YOU GOT THE RIGHT!

mmcd's picture

If you have the stomach for it try reading Marc (Catholic Case for Torture) Theissen's last three Wapo articles.

Eric.Arthur.Blair's picture

What were Saint Reagan's glorious military ventures? Well, he kicked an anthill...er...invaded Grenada in 1983, he bombed Libya in 1986 (for which the hijacking of PanAm 73 in 1986 and the bombing of PanAm 103 in 1988 were the retaliation). When 241 American servicemen were killed in Lebanon in 1983 what did ol' Ronnie do? He withdrew. Did the revered Reagan confront the Soviet Union (except with lame jokes)? No - he negotiated - that's what all that to-do in Reykjavik was about.

To his credit, though, one of the things Reagan feared most was the possibility of killing innocent civilians during retaliatory strikes against terrorists. But that's an aspect of their demigod that wingnuts like Kristol choose to ignore.

Comments are closed on this entry