Tuesday, November 13th, 2012
16

Sexy Petraeus Scandal Vaguely Reminds America of 11-Year-War In Afghanistan

"Stop emailing my boyfriend."David Petraeus is snide gnome with a toupée hairstyle, and he is not even very good at winning wars—his military career can be accurately described as a draw in Iraq and total defeat in Afghanistan. As his personal scandal of marital infidelity involves ever more civilian women, shirtless FBI agents sexting those women, fellow commanders in Afghanistan, and the entire state of Florida, perhaps we will take a pause in our race for additional sleazy details to ask additional, important questions that are also about as sexy as a 60-year-old man with his pants off.

1. Why are we still fighting a war in Afghanistan that we apparently lost more than a decade ago, at Tora Bora?

2. Why do we only hear anything about this failed imperial war when U.S. troops are urinating on the dead, or burning Qurans, or when the previous commander is insulting the vice president in the presence of a Rolling Stone reporter, or when it is the war's "10th birthday"?

3. Is Elmo the Muppet a legitimate player in this tawdry Floridian affair?

16 Comments / Post A Comment

stuffisthings (#1,352)

First time I felt old: when my ex girlfriend had a kid.

Time I felt oldest: when I realized my ex girlfriend's *second* kid, who can now *talk*, is still younger than a war I protested against in college.

I thought Balk was covering the "making everyone feel old and depressed" beat around here.

Brian Calandra (#3,753)

"Why are we still fighting a war in Afghanistan"

Because we promised the women of that country that they would not be stoned to death in soccer stadia again. Talk all you want about how our generals suck or the US sucks or the US lost wars, but it would be nice if we could just prevent women from being buried up to their necks and then struck with stones until they are dead.

Ken Layne (#262)

@Brian Calandra That's not why the U.S. launched a war against Afghanistan. It was because of 9/11 and Bin Laden. Human rights violations are *always* used to justify a new war to liberals, but the fact is that the Taliban was doing all that evil shit for years and years–it militarily controlled most of Afghanistan by the early 1990s, a decade before 9/11–and it never concerned the Pentagon until New York and Washington got hit by a Bin Laden plot. Remember, had the Taliban turned over Bin Laden to the U.S., we claimed we wouldn't invade. Women and homosexuals being stoned to death had nothing to do with it.

stuffisthings (#1,352)

@Brian Calandra
“US Aims: 70 percent—To avoid a humiliating US defeat (to our reputation as a guarantor). 20 percent—To keep SVN (and the adjacent) territory from Chinese hands. 10 percent—To permit the people of SVN to enjoy a better, freer way of life. ALSO—To emerge from the crisis without unacceptable taint from methods used. NOT—To ‘help a friend,’ although it would be hard to stay in if asked out.”

Not sure US policy priorities have changed all that much since 1965 w/r/t citizens of poor countries where we are currently fighting wars.

ETA: Though the level of taint we find acceptable has notably increased.

Brian Calandra (#3,753)

@Ken Layne You wrote "Why are we still fighting a war in Afganistan," not "Why did we launch a war in Afganistan." You're absolutely right, we had known since the early 1990s that the Taliban was doing this, and we did nothing. Then we did something, because of 9/11 and Bin Laden, but who cares why? As a result of this, the Taliban stopped burying women up to their necks and striking them repeatingly with rocks until they were dead. Or at least stopped doing it so frequently. So if you ask "Why are we *still* fighting a war Afganistan," the answer, for me, will always be so that women and homosexuals and every living thing in Afganistan is not immobilized and beaten to death. Obviously, the US will leave soon and the Taliban will retake power and commit disgusting atrocities. At least I'll have your trenchant analysis to console myself with when the videos are posted to YouTube.

stuffisthings (#1,352)

@Brian Calandra So to summarize your moral argument: someone was doing a bad thing. We hurt the people who were doing the bad thing, as well as some of the people they were doing the bad thing to, and some other people besides. And when we stop hurting them they will definitely go back to doing the bad thing (and maybe even worse things). Therefore it is right that we hurt them.

Did I get that right?

stuffisthings (#1,352)

@Brian Calandra To put it another way: If you could have dropped a nuclear bomb on Interahamwe headquarters in Kigali in April of 1994, would you have done so?

Bunburying (#81,872)

@Brian Calandra As you seem to recognize, the invasion has not in fact stopped the Taliban from existing or doing repugnant things. There are better ways to combat their fundamentalist bullshit than wars which create more of the fear and resentment that they thrive on.

roboloki (#1,724)

jill kelley is a taliban mole.

IBentMyWookie (#133)

While I understand Ken's larger point, I wish to remind the author that both Alan Rickman and Liam Neeson are in their 60s and I would pay an ungodly sum to see either in their underpants.

petejayhawk (#1,249)

@IBentMyWookie My only regret is that I have but one thumb up to give for this.

pissy elliott (#397)

@IBentMyWookie I cosign this with red lipstick on Ed Harris' bare bottom.

deepomega (#1,720)

We're still in Afghanistan because Obama ran on the "no, THAT'S the good war!" plank in 2008. This is pretty simple.

Why aren't we talking about it? Well, I don't want to say it's because liberals are terrible at protesting the shitty behavior of Democrat presidents, but it is DEFINITELY because liberals are terrible at protesting the shitty behavior of Democrat presidents.

#2: Or when a former NFL player is killed by friendly fire. Wait, no: when someone EXPOSES the fact that a former NFL player was killed by friendly fire, years later.

Lockheed Ventura (#5,536)

Afghanistan is old news. There is a possibility that this scandal ties into the planning for the next war, and that is the scary part.

r&rkd (#1,719)

@Lockheed Ventura
Wait, which one are you thinking of??

Post a Comment