Tuesday, May 12, 2009

War Casualites are Ok Now

I was just watching the esteemed Rachel Maddow of MSNBC interview one of her pundits about the ramp up of U.S. troop casualties that may occur in Afghanistan. The pundit said that deaths would likely rise but we shouldn't gauge mission success or failure by that metric.

Apparently, under Obama, deaths don't matter to liberals. Under Bush they were very concerning. Indeed, reporting of the death toll in Iraq was a daily headline from 2004 to 2007. The ultimate lesson is that whatever Obama does, for liberals and MSNBC blabbers who open their cake holes for a shrinking audience, it's all good.


Anonymous said...


Say what you will about Maddow, but don't paint Exum with the same broad brush. If you're going to allege hypocrisy, it's vital that you go back and look at what the same folks (not generic 'liberals') had to say earlier on. Exum was on the record supporting the surge. He has the combat record to back it up. And, notwithstanding his comments last night, he's been among the more skeptical voices on our present strategy.

Not everything is best viewed through a partisan lens.

Dennis said...

Like I wrote in my comment on Exum's blog, I agreed with most of what he wrote. He seemed reasonable so that's why I checked him out. I don't know his history so maybe you're right and I lumped him in with the loopy lu's when I should not have. Kudos to him if he's been appropriately skeptical.

D.E. said...


You are a fucking mongoloid lacking even an iota of knowledge about COIN. Remember Vietnam? What metric did we focus on then? It's logic along that line. EXUM WAS A FUCKING PLATOON LEADER WITH THE RANGERS, you idiot! You think he doesn't care about the troops? No, he's simply saying true success will not be visible by looking only at troop casualties. God, you are so fucking dumb it astounds me. I would delete your moronic post and your equally moronic blog if I were you.