via The Heretik, who has been on fire lately, we find that Ol' Man Rummy has had a dickens of a time ruminating on history and stuff:
Ah, the soft bigotry of low expectations. There's no reason to believe that brown people can't have a civil war as totally righteous as Our Civl War ©. They just need some time to craft that Free-the-Slaves messaging. If only one side in Iraq were killing innocent people for something we could package. But the fact is that the challenge of figuring out a way to capture the dispute over Muhammad's chain of custody in a catchy slogan is a tricky one.
Rumsfeld is desperate to make this thing a secular revolution instead of a civil war, righteous or otherwise. Too bad for him that the messaging on that would be closest to Yankee Go Home.
UPDATE: The Brad Blog is pitching this post written by Winter Patriot, which won't be available until 1pm ET:
USA Swings Both Ways: Pentagon Backs Both Sides in the Iraqi Civil War
It's Nothing Less Than Treason If It's True… … and by all accounts it appears to be true!
That's been predicted by me and plenty of other bloggy minds. It fits in perfectly with the neocons' political and economic theory of Universal Chaos. I'm interested to see if Winter Patriot's got the proof that we are playing both sides in Iraq.
How dense can the administration be? They won't admit there's a civil war until they see Robert E. Lee marching through Baghdad with armies waving the Confederate flag.
Posted by: Agi | August 04, 2006 at 12:18 PM
You're onto something. If only we can get a Lee-like character to fight for one of the sides and then we arm it to the teeth, we can have Our Civil War AND the South can win this time. That will drive up the popularity of BushCo's War on Iraq AND might could get the South out of the funk they're in. Costuming may be enough to the message across.
This idea is no more stupid or unrealistic than anything advanced by the PNAC.
Posted by: eRobin | August 04, 2006 at 01:28 PM