Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Awesome! Kinda puts things historical reference, don’t it?
History is repeating itself. We have grown timid, lazy, and complacent. Too many people are worried about their XBox 360’s red circle of death instead of the real threats of the day.
Thanks, hhopper!
I agree with Andy Rooney who knew the General Personally, but can be gleaned from this speech alone (attitude is accurate?) – – – –
What a blow hard.
Screw him and all the other pro-war jingoistic a-holes that think GOUSA has a god given right to whatever strikes our fancy at the time.
Well that’s all fine and good, but unfortunately we have Monty’s Flying Circus of Bushy Baboons leading the charge instead of General Patton.
If you watch the rest of the movie and read some books on Patton you’ll see that he used nazis in adinistramtive positions and as a result kept order by keeping soldiers employed and off the streets with guns. Why couldn’t somebody in the pentagon have rented this movie after we declared victory?… I seriously doubt Patton would think that this war has been handled well.
And from a tearful proud Canadian…Thank You and God Bless
I can’t work out if its supposed to be a satire, or if the people behind it actually believe that ‘horse dung’.
Judging by the dedication stuff at the end these people are serious, its frightening.
Just plain tacky.
That wasn’t Patton… that was Dick Cheney expressing his neocon opinions while disguised as a soldier. Too bad that good old war-mongering Dick Cheney is the epitome of a Chickenhawk, never having served in the military.
But in reality Patton would NEVER express this type of opinion were he alive… on the contrary, he would be furious that the very freedoms that he fought for are being dismantled in the name of national security… that Americans are cowering behind ‘Daddy Government’ for protection… that the very principles that were the core of his America are now being given up so readily.
List the reasons that he wanted to fight ‘the Red menace” and you will quickly see that this is exactly the type of society that the right wing neo-cons want to lead us into… a society all actions monitored, controlled and requira approval by the government, everyone under suspicion, control of the press, no freedom of religion, loyalty to party above loyalty to country or family, etc.
America’s new right wing… traitors to what Patton fought for, and he would most likely recognize it as such and be sickened by it.
First it’s “quotations” from long-dead great Americans (I’m thinking specifically about a fake Lincoln quote that was making the rounds recently, where ‘rails’ against anyone who doesn’t support the U.S. government in wartime), and now this …
Doesn’t ever strike the average neo-con supporter – those few left – as odd that they have to resort to the Land of Makebelieve before they can find a person – any person – of greatness who espouses their preferred talking points? If they are SO right about this, and we great unwashed ‘libruls’ (which is now up to about 60% of the population) SO wrong, then why do they have to make shit up? Constantly and in every way imaginable, they just invent speeches and facts to ‘prove’ their points.
As a bit of historical back-ground; Patton was the kind of soldier who liked battles he could sink his teeth into – ones where his forces were on one side, the enemy was on the other, and both willingly entered into contest directly against each other. It is highly unlikely that he would have equated anything that he experienced in WWs I&II, or studied in ancient history (his favorite topic), with what we are doing today.
And to the extent that it’s possible to assume how he would fight a War on Terror (and again – a war against a tactic, NOT an enemy would be utterly alien to Patton), my guess is that he would be so utterly ruthless as to get himself demoted or fired – again – after creating the kinds of political problems that we’ve already seen he was famous for when he was alive, and that we’ve already seen today, where the people we’re supposedly trying to ‘save’ (not to mention our allies) more or less turn against us.
Nice fantasy, and love the production values (that dude must have practiced hard to get the vice down so well) … but like all things that have hyped the Bush/Cheney line since 9/11, it’s total Bull Shit.
How about a video of a real general, not some Hollywood re-imagining of one, that has been there and knows exactly what the deal is…
Gen. NORMAN SCHWARZKOPF: On the question of going to Baghdad_ if you remember the Vietnam war, we had no international legitimacy for what we did. As a result, we, first of all, lost the battle in world public opinion. Eventually, we lost the battle at home.
In the Gulf war, we had great international legitimacy in the form of eight United Nations resolutions, every one of which said, “Kick Iraq out of Kuwait.” Did not say one word about going into Iraq, taking Baghdad, conquering the whole country and- and hanging Saddam Hussein. That’s point number one.
Point number two- had we gone on to Baghdad, I don’t believe the French would have gone and I’m quite sure that the Arab coalition would not have gone. The coalition would have ruptured and the only people that would have gone would have been the United Kingdom and the United States of America.
And, oh, by the way, I think we’d still be there. We’d be like a dinosaur in a tar pit. We could not have gotten out and we’d still be the occupying power and we’d be paying 100 percent of all the costs to administer all of Iraq.
Politics aside, damn good George C. Scott impression.
Great performance from Mr. Scott – but most people don’t know that the real Patton had a rather high and nasal voice.
What’s the difference between far left bullshit and far right bullshit? Nothing, it’s still bullshit.
Some of you here have little appreciation for those that have died to make this the greatest country in the world. We are again under attack and you show little respect for those that are dieing again to protect you. You should at least hate the radical terrorist a little more than George Bush.
“You should hate the radical terrorist a little more than George Bush”
How does that work exactly? I mean, what a simplistic, silly thing to say. I hate the people responsible for making the world less safe, less good. Right now, there are some pretty horrid people (under the flag “radical terrorist”) but to assume George Bush is automatically better is distinctly un-American. To me, George Bush and those who are his past (like, oh, his dad) are the reason they even wanted to come “fight us over here” in the first place…we were “fighting them there” a long time ago, before there was a threat. To miss the retaliation angle…to miss that the “new radicals” come chiefly from what WE (under George Bush) have done, is just ignorance…ignorance that will keep this dangerous war fueled.
I hate the first truly radical terrorists…but I hate that one of our own has gone and made a lot more people turn that direction than could have. They are not my responsibility, though maybe my concern…but, George Bush is one of us…he should be held to a standard of knowing better.
11.
we are not under attack, but we are provoking several…..
#8 – JPV – Good post. Very poignant. It is, of course, benefitted by 20/20 hindsight. I watched an earlier interview with Gen. Schwartzkopf, in which he attested that basically the only reason we stopped short of Baghdad the FIRST time was because then-Gen. Colin Powell, after a flyover of the Kuwait City to Baghdad highway, was horrified by what he saw (hundreds of corpses burnt to death in the act of trying to escape from their tanks, etc.) and convinced Bush the Elder and the rest of the civilian leadership that to continue would be “unchivalrous”. H. Norman (Gen. Schwartzkopf) and his team and indeed many of our fellow citizens were actually anywhere from disappointed to downright PISSED that we didn’t “finish the job”.
Hey Bob, is that what all the people who died really do, to make this the greatest country in the world? Can any one who puts a little thought into history really believe that?
#17 BertDawg –
Nice “cover your ass” piece of revisionist history… too bad it is utterly untrue.
The general consensus is that the first gulf war was stopped because the US did not want to become an occupation army in Iraq. The objective was to severely decimate the Iraqi military, obtain major surrender concessions and let the regime fall on it’s own. The politicians and leaders of the time knew all around that going into Iraq and becoming an occupying force in a foreign land was something that should not even be considered.
The difference between Bush Sr and Bush Jr is that Bush Sr actually listened to the generals, diplomats and advisers around him regardless of his agreement with them, while Bush Jr only listens to his inner circle of people that see things (or at least pretend to see things) the way that the president wishes them to be.
#19 – Awake (sort of) – As much as you’d like to believe it, I did not make that up. It was on either the Discovery Channel or the Military Channel a couple years ago. Schwartzkopf said exactly that, and seemed to be defending himself from an interviewer who evidently felt the job was unfinished.
He also went on to admit that he and his team screwed up when discussing the terms of surrender with the Iraqi generals. When the Iraqi general asked for permission to fly their military aircraft (including armed helicopters) Schwartzkopf and his team said okay since so much of their infrastructure had been demolished. It was believed that they needed that concession to conduct the day-to-day business of recovery. The mistake in that concession became clear when some of those helicopters were used to attack Kurds in the north. That’s why Operation Provide Comfort became Northern Watch.
Rather than “cover my ass” consider yourself mooned.
General Patton of course did not sound like George C. Scott. I’m sure he would have liked to. Instead he had a high pitched voice, and sounded like a prepubescent girl. Which probably made the rhetoric more shocking.
20–Worse, Sadam used those helicopters to decimate the Marsh Arabs after Bush Sr encouraged them to revolt. Another Bay of Pigs fiasco destroying any credibility of GOUSA being pro-Iraqi people. That error came home in spades after the Iraq War–they didn’t believe much of wht the GOUSA told them. We are pretty much the authors of our own sad tale==pens bought and paid for and story line suggested by BushCo.
What I have never figured out is why GOUSA did not extend the no fly zone over the entire country once Sadam’s use of helicopters was displayed.
Shameful the way GOUSA acts and then expects all to be forgotten with our next lie.
“Some of you here have little appreciation for those that have died to make this the greatest country in the world. We are again under attack and you show little respect for those that are dieing again to protect you. You should at least hate the radical terrorist a little more than George Bush.
Comment by Bob”
Fuck you, Bob.
I served my country, as did my father and too many uncles to list. And MOST of us – myself included – didn’t need a draft to do it. So I won’t have some little keyboard jockey like you telling me I don’t “appreciate” my brothers & sisters who have died, or that there sacrifices were indeed to help make us the greatest country in the world, just because I have enough sense to see the hurricane on the horizon bearing down on all of us.
The problem with chicken hawks like you is that you have no idea – NONE – what military service is all about, let alone war & the death/destruction wrought by it. You think in the 1 dimensional, hollywood-like terms about what patriotsm & sacrifice mean. The kindthat your Svengalis in FOX News knows appeals to you.
True patriotism to your country is like being a true friend to your buddy – you tell ’em when they’re screwing up, if only to keep them from hurting themselves and their loved ones down the line. If you really care, you call a spade a spade. But if you’re the superficial sort, and only care about your bud insofar as the next kegger, yeah – you let them fuck up and then maybe shake your head later & say “What could I do?”
I’ll tell you what you can do – you can get your head out of your ass and do the right thing. You sacrifice your own complacency to do something hard – the hardest thing of all – which is to realize and accept when you are wrong. Realize and accept that just because someone’s a president they aren’t always in their right mind. Understand and accept that greatness comes from more than just being able to blow shit up. And then realize and accept that We the People must INSIST that our leaders in government think in more than 1 dimension, and to act on our behalf in all ways (liberty as well as security), because that’s what we pay them to do. If they can’t protect the freedoms at home that they say they are sending our soldiers to die for abroad, what’s the goddamn point? We won’t stay great for long without holding ourselves to our own 230 year old standards.
George Bush IS the greater danger. Because oil and money and power all mean more to him than people. Because he can’t figure out how to fight the terrorists without sacrificing our cherished principles, as well as our cherished lives.
His is a scorched-earth strategy, Bob, and sooner or later you will realize that the burning smell is coming from beneath your feet too.
#22 – bobbo – I must be getting senile, as I had intended to paint the whole picture of the ramifications of that mistake. Glad you were there to finish the job.
#23 – Odyssey67 – Extremely well said – please consider this a standing ovation from a 21-year military veteran. Thank you.
I really liked the video’s ending
Support our Troops
Yup. Bring ’em home, out of harm’s way.
#4
Patton’s view of using former NAZI administrators in post war Germany is clear for those who studied WWII history. Patton was criticized for comparing NAZI party membership to American political party membership. All pre war German government officials were required by law to be a member of the NAZI party whether they personally subscribed to NAZI party ideology or not. If Patton refused to use any former member of the NAZI party meant not using any pre war German government officials – period.
Post war Germany was in utterly in shambles. Patton firmly believed in never telling someone HOW to do their job after they have been told what his objective was. Patton was able to communicate his vision to others and inspired others to follow it. Therefore as the administration of post war Germany was in his charge and he felt that it entirely was up to him how accomplish the task assigned him.
Regarding former Nazis don’t forget:
Werner von Braun was a NAZI party member who knowingly used slave labour in the construction of V1 and V2 production. He got America to the Moon.
Oskar Schindler was also a NAZI party member who used his NAZI connections for what was ultimately was a great humanitarian act.
Many people forget Patton was correct about Russia and wanted to attack Russia while America (and Allies) were in the best position to do so as war, he felt, was inevitable. The only reason Russia was a member of Allies was they were fighting the Germans as well. No one trusted Stalin due to his policies and agreements with Hiter.
Yes, Britain had also signed treaties with Nazi Germany but for quite different reasons than Stalin. Britain was attempting to prevent war while Stalin and the Soviet Union was on the road of expansion in as much as Hitler was such as USSR annexation of the Baltic States etc.
Russia had signed a non-aggression pact with NAZI Germany and agreed with the deposition and division of Poland between both countries. Thus allowing Hitler to proceed with his plan of Nazi Germany’s expansion.
Russia, as well, was supplying food stuff and raw materials for NAZI Germany’s war effort right until Hitler’s Operation Barbarossa in 1941- the invasion of the Soviet Union. Until that point Russia, while not trusting Hitler, was not planning to join the Allies in its war with NAZI Germany.
Prior to Nazi Germany’s invasion of Poland, Hitler wanted the support of Britain, France etc as the Soviet Union was moving West so if he didn’t act Russia would soon be on Germany’s doorstep, something which was unthinkable. It was a forgon conclusion anyway that Poland was going to be wiped out of existence by the Soviet Union as Hitler reasoned so he thought Britain, France etc would join with him in fighting the true enemy – and was surprised when this didn’t happen.
Sorry I got a bit long winded…
Cheers