To: frankw1900 who wrote (76208 ) 2/21/2003 9:36:41 AM From: Win Smith Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500 Right, Frank. Editing "Someday, maybe somebody will explain what Iraq has to do with Al Qaeda or OBL." to "Someday, maybe somebody will explain what Iraq" in order to go off on the usual Saddam=Hitler diatribe is the kind of "substantive discussion" you dig. The edited half-sentence isn't even grammatical. Just for entertainment, here's another take on that hoariest of local bogus analogies:I ended up thinking that the Nazi analogy paralyzes the debate about Iraq rather than clarifying it. Like any other episode in history, today's situation is both familiar and new. In the ruthlessness of the adversary it resembles dealing with Adolf Hitler. But Iraq, unlike Germany, has no industrial base and few military allies nearby. It is split by regional, religious, and ethnic differences that are much more complicated than Nazi Germany's simple mobilization of "Aryans" against Jews. Hitler's Germany constantly expanded, but Iraq has been bottled up, by international sanctions, for more than ten years. As in the early Cold War, America faces an international ideology bent on our destruction and a country trying to develop weapons to use against us. But then we were dealing with another superpower, capable of obliterating us. Now there is a huge imbalance between the two sides in scale and power. theatlantic.com And Fallows isn't particularly against a war, he's just a little more clear eyed than the faithful about what Perle's grand scheme actually entails. Just keep bleating out the self-righteous platitudes, though, that's what you're good at. I can't decide if the message I'm responding to is better or worse that the one on the official Orwell-approved usage of Islamofascist, but it's good enough. PS on the "Orwell schtick"Meaningless words. In certain kinds of writing, particularly in art criticism and literary criticism, it is normal to come across long passages which are almost completely lacking in meaning. Words like romantic, plastic, values, human, dead, sentimental, natural, vitality , as used in art criticism, are strictly meaningless, in the sense that they not only do not point to any discoverable object, but are hardly ever expected to do so by the reader. When one critic writes, "The outstanding feature of Mr. X's work is its living quality," while another writes, "The immediately striking thing about Mr. X's work is its peculiar deadness," the reader accepts this as a simple difference opinion. If words like black and white were involved, instead of the jargon words dead and living, he would see at once that language was being used in an improper way. Many political words are similarly abused. The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies "something not desirable." resort.com That is, of course, a direct quote of Orwell on "the Orwell schtick". Not that it's suprising that the "war is peace" crowd is so dedicated to twisting things up in knots. All part of the war marketing plan, it seems. PPS: I'm quite amused by the piling on messages from your friends in the "war is peace" crowd. The impartial self-appointed arbiter of what kind of sneering is and isn't allowed here is even more amusing on the self-righteousness front that you are.