My Blog List

People I Know

Eclectic Folks

Media Blogs

Politics, Policy Blogs

Page Rank

Check Page Rank of your Web site pages instantly:

This page rank checking tool is powered by Page Rank Checker service

Saturday, January 13, 2007

Meet the New Tactic, Same As the Old Tactic QUESTIONS

My good friend Mark sent me this a couple days ago:

General: Now, Field Marshal Hague has formulated a brilliant new tactical plan to ensure final victory in the field.

Captain Blackadder: Ah, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of our trenches and walking very slowly towards the enemy, sir?

Captain Darling: How could you possibly know that Blackadder? It's classified information!

Captain Blackadder: It's the same plan that we used last time, and the seventeen times before that.

General: Exactly! And that is what is so brilliant about it! It will catch the watchful Hun totally off guard. Doing precisely what we've done eighteen times before is exactly the last thing they'll expect us to do this time! There is, however, one small problem...

Captain Blackadder: That everyone always gets slaughtered in the first ten seconds?

General: That's right. And Field Marshal Hague is worried that this may be depressing the men a tad. So, he's looking to find a way to cheer them up.

Captain Blackadder: Well, his resignation and suicide would seem the obvious.


I didn't know the source, though I've subsequently figured out - I am a librarian, after all - that it's a bit from the fourth series of the popular BBC sitcom Blackadder, with Captain Blackadder played by Rowan Atkinson.

There was no ambiguity WHY he sent it, however.
So, my questions:

1) Did you happen to catch George, Jr. on TV Wednesday night? Recorded it, haven't watched.
2) If we're now in Iraq "to win", or whatever rhetoric he used, what were we doing before?
3) I've read this in the Washington Post, and even reprinted in the Huffingtonn Post:
"When President Bush goes before the American people tonight to outline his new strategy for Iraq, he will be doing something he has avoided since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003: ordering his top military brass to take action they initially resisted and advised against."
WHAT? Weren't there generals who wanted a much larger forcee before the war began, and who were instead replaced by those who agreed to a smaller force? Now, we have a group of generals who don't want a buildup, some of whom (conincidentally) are being replaced by more compliant military heads.
4) So how does this play out? Does the war escalate, with imbedded U.S. troops? Do the Democrats freeze funding at the current level? What will be the political fallout? At this point, I haven't a clue.

2 comments:

Scott said...

My wife and I were talking briefly about this last night. We both are getting fed up. I forsee that the Republicans are going to get smacked around again. If I was someone up high in the Republican party, I would be finding away to disassociate my whole party from W.

Of course, this comes from someone that doesn't like to follow politics in the first place because they all get me so mad.

By the way, I love Blackadder. It's a great series. The first season isn't that good, but two, three, and four are great.

Uthaclena said...

We should never have been in Iraq - it was a complete series of LIES by the Bush administration - and much of the current chaos is OUR fault. And, even though we broke it, we can't fix it, and need to get the Hades out. The poor Iraqis will FURTHER pay the price in accelerated sectarian violence, the Middle Eastern powers will be re-configured, and once THAT settles out, then we may figure out what our relationship and policies should be. Nothing good will come out of this -- live by the sword, die by the sword. It's time to cut and run.