Petraeus Explicitly Compares Extreme Religious Right To Taliban
Tweet
No doubt the accomodationist left will clutch their pearls and the righties will reach for their fainting couches, but Petraeus is spot on.
Gen. David H. Petraeus on Tuesday denounced plans by a Florida church to burn copies of the Koran this weekend, saying the demonstration could ‘endanger troops’ and damage the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan.
‘It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems,’ Petraeus, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, said in a statement. ‘Not just here, but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community.’
54 Responses to “Petraeus Explicitly Compares Extreme Religious Right To Taliban”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
I could be wrong, but when he says “It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems” I don’t really think he is comparing them to the Taliban. He’s saying that the Taliban would use this kind of action as a means of drumming up support for themselves.
–”How Believable is David Petraeus?” — Oliver Willis, 2007
–”They’re like the little kid who can’t hack it on the playground and goes to hide behind Mommy’s skirt. But in this case the skirt is General Petraeus’ uniform. Pathetic.” — Oliver Willis, 2007
To clarify what I said above, I mean that the Taliban would point to what these people in the US were doing and use it as a recruitment tool.
But remember, Kos’s new book “American Taliban” is dangerous extremism! How dare he even make analogies between the ineffable good that is us, and the irredeemable evil that is them?!
No matter what flavor of invisible sky-god is invoked, a fundy is a fundy.
They squeal bloody murder when we point out that they are advocating bloody murder, just like the Taliban. Will it matter to them that now an American General is saying it?
Now, I know they don’t respect our armed forces anything like the way they pretend to, but maybe they will be at least somewhat reluctant to attack General Petraeus.
Note that even Farris isn’t attacking him directly, only saying, “Look, over there! You disagreed with General Petraeus on other things, so it’s hypocritical of you to agree with him ever!”
The “accommodationist left” will definitely NOT be clutching their pearls, because “the accommodationist left” does not exist.
But hey, whatever it takes to convince yourself you’re ‘balanced’.
If they want to burn books then let them. Legally you can’t stop them even though you have a problem with it…
Oh wait, isn’t this the same argument you were using in defense of building a mosque in NYC?
I guess you just take whichever side fits you better.
Such a joke Oliver… get a life and a real job.
Why is a member of the American military commenting on free speech issues. He is there to defend the constitution not tell Americans to give up that exercise because we might offend someone.
War is offensive. Why not give that up. If he is concerned about the welfare of soldiers then bring them home. He has a lot of weapons systems to use to protect troops and he thinks that an abstract thing like speech might endanger them.
Book burning is horrible. The military injecting itself into speech issues is worse. They once told us not to flash the peace sign cause it hurt troops in Viet Nam. If violent Muslims want to attack American troops because a bunch of Bible thumpers want to exercise their right to free speech and Petraeus is afraid, this war is over.
And by the way what reason are we there for this week anyway?
As for the religious right being just like the Taliban–they don’t actually fly planes into buildings, stone women, organize against the U.S. government. What a load of crap. He needs to come home.
Of course they have the right to burn books, even the Q’ran. Just as we have the right to call them out as the jingoist assholes they are.
The point, BHolt, isn’t that they don’t have a *right* to burn books. The point isn’t that doing so will annoy those people in the US who believe the Constitution means something. The point is that doing so provides an outstanding propaganda weapon to our enemy, and we have our top field commander saying so. This is not the usual jingoistic “every antiwar protest hurts the troops” (why? Because it will hurt some poor Marine’s fee-fees apparently), but a realistic statement of messaging going on in the Muslim world, sending the signal to Muslims everywhere who aren’t sure what to think about America that, “Yes, America hates you and wants to destroy you and your entire culture!”
But like most conservatives, you seem not give a tinker’s damn about anything that *actually* endangers the troops or makes their mission more difficult, since everything is about giving *you* that little red-white-and-blue stiffy that only comes from hippie-bashing.
Of course they have the right to burn books, even the Q’ran. Just as we have the right to call them out as the jingoist assholes they are.
Except that wasn’t your argument with the Ground Zero Mosque controversy, SQ. It was, ‘they have a right to build it so STFU you racist bigot, end of story’.
There isn’t a shred of intellectual honesty anywhere to be found here, is there?
Fundamentalist Christians resemble fundamentalist Muslims in their stupidity and intolerance? You don’t say?
I gotta agree with Rheinhard here..Stupid move..endangers troops, increase recruitment, and solidifies and even gives credence to the stories that recruiters tell about us.
I think personally, that we should stop them from burning the books on the grounds that it endangers our National security…its what Bush would do..wouldn’t he?
Except that wasn’t your argument with the Ground Zero Mosque controversy, SQ. It was, ‘they have a right to build it so STFU you racist bigot, end of story’.
No one said they didn’t have the right to be racist assholes and create new enemies for the US. They have a First Amendment right to hate our country’s values, even to harm our country with their unpatriotic actions, just as the far more patriotic Muslims have the right to build a religious structure on private property in New York in support of American values. I will defend the rights of fundamentalist morons to expose their anti-American values for public revulsion, just as I will defend the right of Muslims to worship in peace even though I am an atheist. I do not appreciate the harm the book burners are doing to our standing in the world, but exposure of our native born, anti-American, Christian-in-name-only enemies is better than concealment.
Are you actually arguing that the book burners are NOT anti-American racist morons? How could anyone ever complain about Muslims, when we have hate-filled “Christians” like these?
There isn’t a shred of intellectual honesty anywhere to be found here, is there?
Yet you keep looking over here. Obsessively. Compulsively.
So now those Muslinists at the NotAtGroundZeroNotaMosqueRichCorinthianLeatherSwimmingPoolandFoosballCentre are planning to burn [Christian] Bibles?
I had not heard that.
Rheinhard… you’re a moron just like Oliver…
I didn’t say they should burn the books. I personally don’t think it’s a good idea. It does send a bad message. My point is you left-wing nutcases think that people have a right to build a mosque where part of a plane landed in the attack on NYC and you called everyone a bigot who did not agree with you. And now you have a problem with burning a book, not because it’s against the law, but because you just don’t think it’s a good idea.
So what you’re telling everyone is that you care more about hurting the feelings of some muslims that are 5000 miles away then you do about hurting the feelings of New Yorkers.
Oh yeah another question, have you ever been in the military? Didn’t think so…
So what you’re telling everyone is that you care more about hurting the feelings of some muslims that are 5000 miles away then you do about hurting the feelings of New Yorkers.
No, that’s not what we’re telling everyone (I’m not, anyway). Care to try again?
Building an Islamic cultural center does not endanger US troops. In fact, just the opposite: it makes the US look like the religiously tolerant country it should be under the 1st Amendment.
Burning Korans, however, does endager US troops who are involved in nation-building in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And while the Florida Teabaggers have the right to burn Korans, American citizens and random people like the general in charge of US military operations in Afghanistan have a right to point out that they are being anti-troop and anti-US in their actions.
Logic, Teabaggers. Try and keep up.
you left-wing nutcases think that people have a right to build a mosque where part of a plane landed in the attack on NYC and you called everyone a bigot who did not agree with you.
We think that the First Amendment protects that right. If you disagree, please show how it doesn’t.
If “bigot” is not the correct term for an American who opposes the Bill of Rights and hates Muslims for no apparent reason, what is the appropriate pejorative?
Are there any other civil rights that you oppose? Voting for women or black citizens? Equal treatment under the law? The right to silence in court? The right to a trial by jury?
Don’t be shy. Paraphrasing Clarence Darrow, we know what you are, so now we would just like to determine your price. Tell us which other revered American values you detest in addition to the First Amendment. Are there any other religions whose practitioners you hate?
I don’t think they should build a mosque, just like I don’t believe in burning religious books to make a statement. I am wondering why you would defend the right to build a mosque based on the fact that it isn’t against the law, then turn around and say that it’s not ok to burn books, which isn’t against the law either. And don’t hide behind the military argument because you didn’t care enough to serve in the military.
Sorry argument failed, try again…
Oh yeah another question, have you ever been in the military? Didn’t think so…
A fat, hanging curve.
US Army, E-5. ETS 15 February 1968.
My service, honorable and free of any form of disciplinary action, was not heroic or valiant enough for chickenhawk Dennis, and my promotions were not respectable enough for F#ckup Frank, who left the service as an E-1.
I am wondering why you would defend the right to build a mosque based on the fact that it isn’t against the law, then turn around and say that it’s not ok to burn books, which isn’t against the law either.
It’s not illegal to burn books. Did anyone say it was? It’s stupid, and it creates enemies we didn’t need, but it is certainly a First Amendment right to hate American values such as tolerance for religions other than your own.
So why do you care about muslims so much that you would kick and scream when someone wants to burn a book, but side with them when thousands of New Yorkers have a problem building a mosque where part of a plane landed during the 9/11 attacks?
Sorry doesn’t make any sense to me, I think both are wrong, and you are just using this as another way to attack people. I’m pointing out a double-standard developed by the left-wing and you’re just avoiding answering the question because you know that you are wrong.
Except that wasn’t your argument with the Ground Zero Mosque controversy, SQ. It was, ‘they have a right to build it so STFU you racist bigot, end of story’.
This would make sense if there was any argument against it not founded on bigotry. I even tried asking for one, and got nothing.
So why do you care about muslims so much that you would kick and scream when someone wants to burn a book, but side with them when thousands of New Yorkers have a problem building a mosque where part of a plane landed during the 9/11 attacks?
Personally, it’s because as a member of a religious minority, I feel it is my duty to stand up to the persecution of other religious minorities.
Also, it helps that the people building the mosque are not radical Muslims, while the guys burning books ARE radical Christians. In other words, it’s a false equivalence.
So why do you care about muslims so much that you would kick and scream when someone wants to burn a book, but side with them when thousands of New Yorkers have a problem building a mosque where part of a plane landed during the 9/11 attacks?
Burning books is stupid but legal. Did I kick and scream? No, I just pointed out that these people hate American values, and they have a perfect right to do so even though they are creating new enemies while acting in opposition to the principles of Christ.
The First Amendment protects the right of Christian fanatics to hate their country and its centuries old values. Good thing for them, isn’t it?
I don’t “side with Muslims,” I side with the Constitution and the First Amendment. Why don’t you?
“A fat, hanging curve.
US Army, E-5. ETS 15 February 1968.
My service, honorable and free of any form of disciplinary action, was not heroic or valiant enough for chickenhawk Dennis, and my promotions were not respectable enough for F#ckup Frank, who left the service as an E-1.”
Ouch.
Seriously O-dub trolls, whipe the Cheetoh dust from your lips and get out of your mom’s basement once in a while.
Oh bholt, it’s hard to believe you might just possibly be the dumbest Teabagger here. There’s a lot of competition, let me tell you.
Let me speak in short words and sentences for you:
Burning Korans is legal and protected under the first amendment.
Building a Muslim cultural center (or a mosque, but that’s not what’s being built in NYC) is also protected under the first amendment.
However, according to General Petraues (who I’m not fan of but hey, under the first amendment he can say what he wants and sometimes he’s correct) only one of these actions might get American troops killed by further inflaming tensions among the very people in Afghanistan that we are supposedly allied with.
And here’s a hint, fuckwit: Building a Muslim cultural center in the heart of America’s greatest city doesn’t upset Muslims. However, a bunch of Teabagger/Republican racist buffoons burning their holy scripture does.
Since you’re of limited cognitive capacity, I’ll connect the dots for you: building a muslim cultural center, or a mosque, shows muslims that America is a tolerant country built on the values of equality and freedom. Having a Koran-burning shows muslims that far too many Americans (like yourself) are ignorant, pig-headed fucks who should move to Saudi Arabia or Iran, actual theocracies where they don’t tolerate freedom of religious expression.
I’ll make it even simpler for you B:
Build Cordoba House. Somebody might feel sad.
Hold a public Koran burning. Somebody might feel dead.
Questions?
BHolt,
Do you believe that God gives America superpowers?
Might explain why picking ones battles is a moot point for wingnuts. Why worry about strategy, cost or logistics when when Jesus will handle it.
I’ll break it down even simpler, without having to invoke the troops:
Build Cordoba house: shows how tolerant we can be.
Burn the Quran: shows how bigoted we can be.
Naturally such logic is lost on the rightards. It’s all filthy brown folk to them.
My service, honorable and free of any form of disciplinary action, was not heroic or valiant enough for chickenhawk Dennis, and my promotions were not respectable enough for F#ckup Frank, who left the service as an E-1.
You’re a lying piece of shit, Repack. I thanked you and praised you for your service. I just wondered why you tried so hard to be so clever for all these years on here and make it appear as if you fought in VietNam when you called everyone else chickenhawks.
It’s simply a question of character, Repack. One you failed to answer.
Seriously O-dub trolls, whipe the Cheetoh dust from your lips and get out of your mom’s basement once in a while.
Hee-hee. A 500 sf apartment in the middle of a grossly crowded city in South Korea living by yourself and you taunt homeowners supporting and raising families here in America.
Not even a hint of intellectual honesty on this thread or the ones on the GZM.
According to the groupthinker lemmings here, General Petraeus and 95% of the rest of the military along with 95% of the US population could agree that it’s not a good idea to burn the Koran, but those 95% could be wrong, so it doesn’t matter what they think. At least that’s what they said when that logic fit their liberal left lemming thought processes.
“It’s simply a question of character, Repack. One you failed to answer.”
A chickenhawk questioning the character of an actual veteran (who happened to be a medic, which means he could have accomplished lots of good behind the front lines).
So typical.
“A 500 sf apartment”
Um, no. But your continuing obsession with every aspect of my personal, professional, and financial livelihood is duly noted.
And honestly, could you try and make your argument again? Because you are literally not making any sense.
Muslims have a right to build a mosque/community center due to the 1st Amendment.
You and your fellow Teabaggers have a right to burn Korans due to the 1st Amendment.
But only one of these actions will lead to the potential death of US troops according to a US general.
Due to your rank stupidity, please never breed again. We have enough moron genes floating around. And please look up the meaning of the word “logic.” Hint: It’s something you’ve never had an ounce of.
Jaim, lots of things the New York Times did lead to the potential deaths of US troops. Lots of things Wikileaks spokesperson Julian Assange published led to the potential deaths of US troops according to military personnel. Neither one of those stopped you from lambasting anyone opposed to their stupidity.
Like always, your logic is all over the place. The only thing consistent with you is you follow the far Left liberal lemming groupthink, to the letter. It’s why you left America and bash its good citizens, the country and most of it’s citizens are just not far left enough for you, including most of the people who post here.
A chickenhawk questioning the character of an actual veteran (who happened to be a medic, which means he could have accomplished lots of good behind the front lines).
Yeah, I questioned why so often he tried to cleverly word his involvement in the Viet Nam war as having actually fought there. You’re the last person here who should be making the statement that someone who served in the military should never have his character questioned. You just did with Petraeus, actually. Again, no consistency of logic from you in any way, shape or form.
I know a Nam medic. It sounded like he had the second most dangerous job there… second to his door gunner.
In wingnuttia, a general is only right if his CIC is Right. That’s because Jesus gives them both superpowers.
the country and most of it’s citizens are just not far left enough for you, including most of the people who post here.
Is my browser not getting the Little Red Book posts? Oliver please fix this at once!
Is Dennis a Christian?
“lots of things the New York Times did lead to the potential deaths of US troops”
Like Judith Miller accepting Dick Cheney’s lies as facts re:WMD, and then pushing them on the public?
Agreed.
“Lots of things Wikileaks spokesperson Julian Assange published led to the potential deaths of US troops according to military personnel.”
Oliver has come out quite strongly against wikileaks and their activities. You are a disingenuous punk with no capacity for sustained logical thought.
“Yeah, I questioned why so often he tried to cleverly word his involvement in the Viet Nam war as having actually fought there.”
He served honorably as a medic, as far as I can tell. Combat medics do their thing on the front lines, hospital medics do it in relative safety. Next you’ll argue that an army nurse isn’t really a soldier if she isn’t actually being shot at. You remain a cowardly chickenhawk who wanted others to die for wars you supported.
“You just did with Petraeus, actually.”
What? No, I didn’t. I don’t agree with everything General Petraeus has done, but I think it’s worth listening to a US general condemning the rank bigotry among your Teabagging brethren.
For the umpteenth time, the 1st Amendment guarantees a right to build a mosque. It also guarantees the right to burn Korans.
It also guarantees the right of sane, adult, and patriotic Americans to condemn racist, bigoted actions that threaten the lives of US soldiers serving abroad.
It also guarantees your right to be an idiot.
A 50 member church trying to get notoriety, and all of Outer-Teabaggia lines up to support them. For 234 years, the right has stood up for intolerance in all of its forms.
Heck of a job, teabaggers.
Oliver has come out quite strongly against wikileaks and their activities. You are a disingenuous punk with no capacity for sustained logical thought.
For which you promptly lambasted him for, Jaim. For which you claimed he sucked goats balls for, too. Disingenuous much? My point stands, Oliver isn’t far left enough for you, so you come to his blog and rail on him. What a nutcase you are, using Oliver’s case against Assange as a counterpoint to me telling you there’s no logical consistency in your thought processes when you went nuts on Oliver for doing it. Idiot freak.
He served honorably as a medic, as far as I can tell. Combat medics do their thing on the front lines, hospital medics do it in relative safety. Next you’ll argue that an army nurse isn’t really a soldier if she isn’t actually being shot at. You remain a cowardly chickenhawk who wanted others to die for wars you supported.
He served honorably as a medic, as far as I can tell. Combat medics do their thing on the front lines, hospital medics do it in relative safety. Next you’ll argue that an army nurse isn’t really a soldier if she isn’t actually being shot at. You remain a cowardly chickenhawk who wanted others to die for wars you supported.
No, Jaim, I never said Repack or any female army nurse did anything dishonorable. I asked Repack why he tried to cleverly make it appear as if he had fought in Viet Nam when he was calling out other people for being chickenhawks. He didn’t have to do that, his service stateside as a medic was honorable enough. To me, anyway, if not to him.
Dennis, do you condemn the burning of Korans?
I asked Repack why he tried to cleverly make it appear as if he had fought in Viet Nam when he was calling out other people for being chickenhawks.
I know now that I didn’t get in harm’s way. I didn’t know that on the day I was sworn in. On that day I assumed I would be waist deep in mud and holding a rifle.
But I went anyway. I didn’t go to Canada or badger a doctor for an excuse. My parents had told me that every healthy young man owed his country military service, which was the standard at the time, and like every other male in my family that I ever knew, I served.
I did what I was told and I didn’t get a scratch, but I did a lot of good for others. I was lucky and I know it.
Like I said, my service was not heroic or valiant enough for a guy who never had to get up before 7:00 a.m. Dennis, you do not have a clue what it was like to enter the US Army in the late sixties.
Or any other time.
Dennis, do you condemn the burning of Korans?
I think it’s a stupid thing to do, yes, but why do you ask? My point is that there’s little intellectual honesty or consistency of logic in anything you post, Jaim.
Like I said, my service was not heroic or valiant enough for a guy who never had to get up before 7:00 a.m. Dennis, you do not have a clue what it was like to enter the US Army in the late sixties.
Or any other time.
And your point is what, exactly, Rapack?
No one is questioning your service or what you went through. No one. You question mine, though. I just ask why you tried to paint a picture that was different from reality.
According to the groupthinker lemmings here, General Petraeus and 95% of the rest of the military along with 95% of the US population could agree that it’s not a good idea to burn the Koran, but those 95% could be wrong, so it doesn’t matter what they think. At least that’s what they said when that logic fit their liberal left lemming thought processes.
Except, unlike the Cordoba house, there are OTHER reasons why it’s a bad idea. The problem with the Cordoba house opposition is that no reasons other than that they’re Muslim or appeals to popularity have been given.
Is Dennis a Christian?
No, Dennis is a Mammonarian.
Ashley Todd Zython, there’s a very good reason why people completely ignore you here, besides being an ankle-biting gnat, I mean. You’re an embarrassment to the liberals here for your Ashley Todd number, and to those of us on the right, you never make a lick of sense, so no one ever knows just what point it is they’re supposed to be arguing with you on. Like the 7 year old little kid brother when you were about 10 or so that your mom said had to hang out with you and your friends who just sits there and says stupid shit and all your friends just roll their eyes at you for bringing him along.
In other words, you don’t have any other arguments? Very well.
Dennis wrote: “I just wondered why you tried so hard to be so clever for all these years on here and make it appear as if you fought in VietNam when you called everyone else chickenhawks.”
Dennis wrote: “No one is questioning your service or what you went through. No one.”
You’re a lying sack of shit, you know that?
But here’s another simple question: Which branch of the armed forces did you serve in, or are you currently serving in, you cowardly little bitch? Hmm?
You’re a lying sack of shit, you know that?
No, Jaim, you’re an idiot. There is no contradiction there. I don’ question his service, just his attempt to portray something he was not. What he did was honorable, and I’ve said that. Evidently it was not honorable enough for him, though.
But here’s another simple question: Which branch of the armed forces did you serve in, or are you currently serving in, you cowardly little bitch? Hmm?
Because I didn’t come of age in the early 60′s and wasn’t drafted doesn’t mean I’ma cowardly bitch for not having served. Unless it means you’re one for not having served, either. Do you think you’re a cowardly bitch, Jaim?
No. If I supported a war and was of age, I’d enlist.
You, however, are a chickenhawk. And you also make threats of physical violence then shit your pants when you’re called on them. And you also question the service of actual vets.