Kristol and Kagan and Gadahn: Little Savages Everywhere:
The Rude Pundit could've gotten a brain-damaged monkey and sat it in front of a giant board filled with squares, each predicting what might happen if the United States invaded Iraq. That brain-damaged monkey could've thrown its shit at the board, and someone could've announced on what square the shit landed, and even if the shit had missed the board entirely, there's a good chance that that brain-damaged, shit-tossing monkey would've been right more often about the war in Iraq than William Kristol or Frederick Kagan.

Kristol was one of the most hysterical drum-thumpers about the phantom weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, stating as absolute fact things that were, in fact, absolutely false. Here he is in October 2001: "And what of the price we will pay for refusing to confront Iraq -- at least now, perhaps ever? We've already given Saddam time to move his chemical and biological weapons programs as far as possible out of potential harm's way, an opportunity of which he appears to have taken advantage."

Unfair, you say, because it was written in the panicked heat of headhunting after 9/11? So here's Kristol (and Robert Kagan - Fred's brother) on January 30, 1998, in the New York Times, pushing for a ground troop invasion of Iraq and mocking Bill Clinton's containment policy: "Unless we act, Saddam Hussein will prevail, the Middle East will be destabilized, other aggressors around the world will follow his example, and American soldiers will have to pay a far heavier price when the international peace sustained by American leadership begins to collapse."

As for consequences of invasion, in a January 2002 Weekly Standard screed, Kristol and Robert Kagan scoffed at anything worse than a Saddam with WMDs: "[T]he Iraq doves claim removing Saddam would be a diversion from the war against al Qaeda, and the cure would be worse than the disease. This is nonsense. It is almost impossible to imagine any outcome for the world both plausible and worse than the disease of Saddam with weapons of mass destruction. A fractured Iraq? An unsettled Kurdish situation? A difficult transition in Baghdad? These may be problems, but they are far preferable to leaving Saddam in power with his nukes, VX, and anthrax." It's easy to mock their hysteria about WMDs because there actually were cooler heads around then, saying, "Um, we should probably be sure about this before we buy Iraq."

However, in the same editorial, the authors were at least a great deal more honest about what would be needed than the Bush adminstration ever was: "The best way to avoid chaos and anarchy in Iraq after Saddam is removed is to have a powerful American occupying force in place, with the clear intention of sticking around for a while." But they also wrote, "The United States should support Ahmad Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress -- they are essential parts of any solution in Iraq." Ah, well, one out of fifty or so ain't bad. It's not like this was about people being killed or anything.

Now, in the current Weekly Standard, Kristol and Frederick Kagan, a man who loves a good surge in his face, state that anyone who wants to try diplomacy with Iran and Syria is a pussy, unlike them with their manly mannishness, and that everyone, including those punk ass Congressional Democrats, needs to stop being such bitches and get behind the escalation.

To Kristol and the Kagans (which, really, is the lamest band name) and all the remaining neo-cons, who for some reason haven't been stripped, tarred, feathered, and forced to run into the forest to live like scavenging beasts, it's all just tough guy talk. They don't give a fuck about the real consequences in blood and money because it ain't their blood and they're rich enough not to give a fuck about what the money might be used for otherwise. It's all just putting theory into action, a long Rube Goldberg device that they hope will end up toasting the bread and frying the egg, except long ago the thing stopped working. They're just the geeks that jump up and say, "Wait, wait, I can get it going again." Mad savages who wouldn't survive a moment outside of their think tanks and TV studios.

Speaking of mad savages, for big time larfs, check out the oooh-you're-so-scary video by Adam Gadahn, now calling himself "Azzam al-Amriki," and his "Look at what happened because you wouldn't go to the prom with me, Betsy" threats against America. The so-called American al-Qaeda member's performance is such a pathetic whine for attention and love by a four-eyed fat fuck that the very sight of it will make bullies everywhere unconsciously clench their fists and want to tell him to meet them behind the gym after school for a good ass-kicking. You just wanna say, "Dude, c'mon, you can't play a Wii in a cave."