c6c056a0385a…

Now consider the insight gained by reading that account, without having ‘been there’.

The Gay Buchanan smears US troops…

Believing that having ‘been there, done that’ gives you some special insight is flawed logic. All it gives you is experience.
rockhauler on January 28, 2007 at 3:59 PM

Don’t really know you RockH, but “All it gives you is EXPERIENCE”…that’s all?
Since experience is so over rated we can rid ourselves of all those pesky internship programs in thousands of jobs around the world.

Might as well hire 22 year old judges as supremes, we can keep ‘em longer ya know.

Should I go on? Experience is as important as any type of education, usually valued of the highest import.

Sullivan’s defense? Well, they’re not in uniforms. Well, yeah, moron. Apparently he meant they just weren’t part of the offical Iraq Army — you know, the legal one. (Well, yeah, moron.) Or who knows what he meant? Even he doesn’t……

Oh, I think we all know very well who’s dishonest and who isn’t here, thanks.

An analogy for you. How many times have some of you parent gotten “advice” from a friend or relative on how to raise children? I think you get my point. Not to say they can’t have a good point here and there, but sometimes, only the parent understand their child’s personality and certainly understands children better than somebody who has never raised one themselves.

If this guy wants to say IN THEORY that roughing up “suspects”–or whatever he wants to call them–is wrong, fine. But if he’s going to pass judgment on U.S. soldiers on the ground regarding videos like this, he better damn well acknowledge that he is NOT THERE and isn’t fully aware of the circumstances that led to what is being seen in the video.

Personally, I’m surprised he didn’t just piss himself and then cry himself to sleep like the little b*#ch he is.

PIMF is my friend

Professor Blather

It is indeed, but HA doesn’t have one. I think we need to protest the lack of Preview, Bezerkley style:

What do we want? PREVIEW!
When do we want it? NOW!

What do we want? PREVIEW!
When do we want it? NOW!

. . .

When is Crazy Andy going to embed with the troops?

Please don’t wish that on the military. Come on, I mean, just think about those words a moment and to whom you’re referring.

Sullivan went off the reservation around 2001, actually. It began with his reaction to the President’ faith-based initiatives. While there are flaws with that program, both in conception and execution, it sent Sullivan into a rage I’d not seen from him before. That seemed to be about the time he began using the term “christianist” as well, though I could be wrong on that.

What I’m pretty convinced of is that he has become so full of BDS that he can’t write anything supportive of the war, the troops, or anything else which might constitute approaching victory for this administration. And if you read his work with that frame of mind, all of his skewed logic fits together.

So, basically, rockhauler you’re saying that it wouldn’t do Sullivan any good to spend any time with the troops he smears? I disagree. They probably wouldn’t enjoy his company, but if he can get past his pet issue and look around a bit the trip would do him a lot of good.

Bryan on January 28, 2007 at 5:44 PM

Just ‘being there’ in and of itself is not sufficient. Which is why I get so frustrated with the leftist (or rightist) fanatics who ‘can’t get passed their pet issues’.
To gain an understanding of any issue, you have to be open to all ideas, no matter how crazy they might sound, and you have to also be suspicious of those ideas, expertly presented.

To reject someone’s argument simply because they have not ‘been there’, is not sufficient. You need more than that.
To require that someone must have ‘been there’ means no jury could ever convict anyone of any crime, because the jury was not present when the crime was committed.

My suggestion would be to clearly designate the blogger “Allahpundit” as “AP” and the Associated Press as “those lying assclowns”

Again, it’s just a suggestion…

re: “No offense”, None taken.
You make a good point. The point of contention, however, is ‘being there’ gives an insight that someone who has not been there can not have.

Presuming that only someone of great experience is qualified to make judgements ignores all those events in human history were the ‘experts’ were wrong.

I would suggest that the qualifier you insert in the following quote,

It’s not exactly a logical leap to suggest that, in at least some respects, those who’ve spent time in Iraq no more about it than I do.

acknowledges my point.

PIMF is my friend

Believing that having ‘been there, done that’ gives you some special insight is flawed logic. All it gives you is experience.

Sure. Right. I’ve never been to Botswana … but somebody who lived there doesn’t have any “special insight” on the country. Right?

My neighbor’s a mechanic. I’m an attorney. I’m sure my opinion on how to rebuild an engine from a ‘66 Camaro is as valid as his. It’s not like his actually, you know, “having been there, done that” gives him any special insight. And I’m sure he understands the legal issues in this brief I’m writing as well as I do – not like law school or years of experience gave me any “special insight” on that subject, either.

I can’t believe you actually spewed that – and then accused someone ELSE of using “flawed logic.” Yikes.

It’s not exactly a logical leap to suggest that, in at least some respects, those who’ve spent time in Iraq no more about it than I do.

“Flawed logic,” indeed. Maybe the funniest thing I’ve read all week. No offense.

I have never been to Iraq, but I can, and do read. Thus I submit the following,
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/gates-of-fire.htm
from which I have gained considerable insight.

(Take it easy on the new guys, everyone was a new guy once. Michael mentions them mostly in passing. I suspect the NCOs took some time to clear up somethings, privately.)

Regards

More “civilians” with mortars hit a girls’ school in Iraq today, killing 5 and wounding 20. Do you think Sullivan will show a tenth of the outrage over their deaths that he did over some terrorists getting beaten?

Were they LESBIAN girls?

If so, St Andrew of the Church of Hypocrisy and Single Issues just MIGHT be offended.

And blame it on Bush, of course.

However, I’m not really concerned about the beatings of terrorists responsible for, say, mortaring secondary girls’ schools.

Not just because I despise animals who would do something like that, but also because the Laws of Land Warfare clearly state that illegal combatants doing that sort of thing, captured out of uniform and in possession of weapons, are eligible for things a whole lot more serious than a mere beating.

If anything, the Iraqi soldiers let them off too easy.