January 13, 2004

HEADBANGING HEADLINES

Progress, of a kind, is noted in Baghdad:

Some in the city are determined to try to get back to normal, like the organisers of what's thought to be one of the first post-Saddam Hussein heavy metal concerts at a community centre in the suburb of Karada.

Meanwhile the nation’s newly-free press is adopting entertaining sales strategies:

"Saddam married 18-year-old girl in spider hole," it screams. Details in the next edition, says a tiny paragraph below. Such are the tactics used to sell newspapers in Iraq.

UPDATE. It’s the triumphant return of Lunchboy!

So Tim 500 dead kids from the mid west and where's your sorry ass. Guess you are at lunch practising being a legend in your own lunch time.

Come on Tim, get down to that recruiting office and sign up for the big foreign adventure you so crave for all us to be on.

Guess not.

Now don't choke on your afternoon latte you yellow belly coward.

Lunch today: five beef tacos.

Posted by Tim Blair at January 13, 2004 12:47 PM
Comments

So Tim 500 dead kids from the mid west and where's your sorry ass. Guess you are at lunch practising being a legend in your own lunch time.

Come on Tim, get down to that recruiting office and sign up for the big foreign adventure you so crave for all us to be on.

Guess not.

Now don't choke on your afternoon latte you yellow belly coward.

Posted by: crock of tim at January 13, 2004 at 01:05 PM

Headline in the next edition:
"Saddam married 18-year-old girl in spider hole....produce alien baby!"

Apparently, they are using some of the American supermarket checkout rags for inspiration!

Posted by: rinardman at January 13, 2004 at 01:05 PM

God, I've missed him.

Posted by: timks at January 13, 2004 at 01:19 PM

I get the impression that ChickenHawk once catered for Tim / a function Tim attended, and he didn't leave a tip.

Posted by: donnyc at January 13, 2004 at 01:23 PM

Oy Crock,

I suppose you aren't rushing off to join a fire brigade. Therefore, according your own feeble form of logic you cannot be against fires.

Posted by: Toryhere at January 13, 2004 at 01:25 PM

Lunch today: five beef tacos.

What, no latte?

Posted by: Roger Bournival at January 13, 2004 at 01:31 PM

Where's the EXPENSIVE WINE, Tim?

Posted by: Marty at January 13, 2004 at 01:41 PM

C'mon, Lunchboy has offered another extensive whine, so it's only fitting...

Posted by: Marty at January 13, 2004 at 01:43 PM

Until they have a photo of Saddam shaking hands with the Space Alien from Weekly World News along with an accompanying story, we really can't say Iraq has achieved full press freedom.

Posted by: John at January 13, 2004 at 01:47 PM

Mmmmm. Tacos.

Posted by: Glenn Reynolds at January 13, 2004 at 01:51 PM

Ironically, I had a doner kebab.
Going by the discomfort in my gizzard and the unearthy noises generated by my nethers, I fear I have consumed evidence of WMD production- specifically Clostridium Botulinum.
'Scuse me, gotta run............

Posted by: Habib at January 13, 2004 at 01:51 PM

Hey, Crock o' Lunch, welcome back! We missed ya.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 13, 2004 at 02:10 PM

Anyone in America remember the picture on the Weekly World News of Clinton being endorsed by an Alien? What was great was that they used the exact same cut-out about two months later to show Clinton being endorsed by Jimmy Hoffa...Still, not as far-fetched as some of the sewage being spewed by Dowd, Adams, Krugman, et. al.

BTW, what sort of WINE goes with tacos? (Or did you goe with Agave...)

Posted by: Jerry at January 13, 2004 at 02:11 PM

Big Hair! You're back! About time the trolls learned from the master, good to hear from you, it's been ages since this site got my tummy rumbling.

Sing along everyone...

"Hi ho, hi ho, it's off to lunch I go
To stuff my face and oppress some Race
Hi ho, hi ho, hi ho hoho hoho.

anyone with a good second verse??

Posted by: Jake D at January 13, 2004 at 02:13 PM

Tim was just following Puce's advice: "Irak is done. Lets tacos."

Posted by: scott h. at January 13, 2004 at 02:15 PM

Tim Blair a leading member of the Coward Right.

The Coward Right send other people to fight their wars while they stay home and write the blogs and give the speeches.

Admit it Tim you are a coward who firmly believes it is not beholden on you in the slightest to offer your services to our army, air force or navy. You want to send them to war so you should sign up to show just how committed you are to these policies you promote.

You are the very definition of a coward who will never see a day of danger in a war zone but will spend a lifetime talking up the reason for this latest war of choice.

500 dead now. 1000 by November.

How many people are you prepared to see killed to make your oil fields safe for the Anglo-American Oil Cartel to return to.

No Tim you are a disgusting coward who cares nothing for the sacrifices of others. Oh you pretend to care for the great sacrifice of others but that's just platitudes. If you really cared you be the first to offer your body and soul to our nation's defense force.

But you have zero intention of getting yourself in any danger. You can't even ask for an embed assignment from your various employers to get you sent to Iraq. You went to America instead and wanked on for weeks about your silly road trip.

What's the problem Tim.

I guess you are just incredibly afraid of getting your Gen X hide shot off and you are simply a coward who wants others to fight your wars.

Tim - it's time you either sign up or shut up.

Posted by: Tim's Pet Hate at January 13, 2004 at 02:22 PM

The troll seems to be projecting his/her negative image of himself onto a convenient target- in this case, Tim Blair. Projecting is a habit for people who just really hate themselves and are having trouble finding a way to resolve it. That's too bad.

Posted by: GirlfromOklahomaUSA at January 13, 2004 at 02:39 PM

If it wasn't too late, we should put in a category of "Best Troll" for the Australian Blog Awards.

Posted by: Marty at January 13, 2004 at 02:39 PM

Ahh TPH, aren't you a good boy? Your principled stand in defence of tyrants is a moral beacon to us all. If only we were all more like you, we could lay back and bath in the warm glowing warming glow of our self-righteousness, allowing the Sadaams of the world to get on with what matters: feeding people into industrial plastic shredders.
You, of course, were a human shield, non?

Posted by: Fidens at January 13, 2004 at 02:47 PM

I can't help but think that Lunchboy is actually Lileks messing with you.

Posted by: Mike Hill at January 13, 2004 at 03:00 PM

I suppose when the entire country and culture supported our troops serving in WW1 and 2 did so out of cowardice.

What about the frontline nurses? How gutless; they weren't even holding a gun.

What a pompous fuck you are, chicken man.

Posted by: donnyc at January 13, 2004 at 03:01 PM

C'mon Tim. We all know you were lunching today on the tender meat of baby seals served on an ivory dish and washed down with the blood of a California condor. Who do you think you're fooling?

Posted by: Randal Robinson at January 13, 2004 at 03:06 PM

Dear Tim Hater,

I did "sign up for the big foreign adventure you so crave for all us to be on". I agree with a hell of a lot that Tim has to say and am a fan of his work. Since you can't use the cliche "chickenhawk" argument with me, why not try to refute the message rather than the messanger? Im sure you will only come back with more regurgitated leftist doctriniation as your type rarely has any original thought of your own.

Some people serve the war effort better by staying at home and doing those things at which they are best suited. War is a depressing thing. Entertainers should stay home and entertain people, hopefully boosting morale. Engineers whose skills do not translate directly into a useful military manner are better off staying home and helping improve technology on the homefront.

Some people may actually contribute more to the fight by not picking up a rifle, but by doing something at which they are better suited. Could Tim have a lot to offer by directly serving in the Australian military? Very possibly, but I do not know him well enough to know for sure. What I do know is that Tim has been very valuable at working to keep the Australian public educated and thus helping to keep Australia as a whole firmly committed to the multinational coalition currently fighting terrorism worldwide.

- SPC TJ Buttrick, US Army

Posted by: TJ at January 13, 2004 at 03:08 PM

We'll know the Iraqi press is really free when we see the headline: " Saddam's 18-year old Girlfriend Claims: A Dingo stole my Baby!"

Posted by: freddyboy at January 13, 2004 at 03:11 PM

Mike Hill: I can't help but think that Lunchboy is actually Lileks messing with you.

BLASPHEMER

Lileks would actually be funny. You must do penance. Give Tim your lunch.

Habib: Ironically, I had a doner kebab.

Well, next time, buy your own damn kebabs, rather than waiting around for people to donate them to you. And learn to spell.

Er, what?

Jake D: Hi ho, hi ho, hi ho hoho hoho.

Yes, good! Especially the "hi ho" part.

(That's a 50 point ref., folks.)

Posted by: Angie Schultz at January 13, 2004 at 03:13 PM

No, freddyboy, it will be a free press when we see the headline: "Steve Irwin (and Tim Blair's) croc ate my baby...for lunch"

Posted by: slatts at January 13, 2004 at 03:30 PM

Thanks Angie, I'll sleep much better now....

Posted by: Jake D at January 13, 2004 at 03:39 PM

Tim, Andrea, guys and gals, I hereby apologise wholeheartedly for wistfully wishing for the return of the trolls in this thread.
I'm really sorry, I should have known that this just encourages them.

Lunch today: The chilled heart of a third-world orphan, with a side of fava beans.

Posted by: Quentin George at January 13, 2004 at 03:51 PM

Yes, Crock of Tim. I'm sure you'll find, if you look back on the casualty figures of previous wars, that 500 casualties is an unusually large number for an army to take when invading a country the size of Iraq.

Posted by: Richard at January 13, 2004 at 04:19 PM

5 tacos for my bunghole!

Posted by: bungholio at January 13, 2004 at 04:21 PM

I love the word lunch. I just love saying it. I love the way it rolls off my tongue. Mmmmmyeah. I think that I, too, have a Lunch Fetish... Lunch lunch lunch lunch lunch.

Posted by: Sortelli at January 13, 2004 at 04:31 PM

For the obligitary Vietnam reference. Does anyone seriously believe if the US was in power in Hanoi in 1964 with 500 deaths, Vietnam would be a quagmire.

Posted by: Quentin George at January 13, 2004 at 04:43 PM

Oy, Crock of Tim / Tim’s Pet Hate (I assume you’re the same person),

I suppose I should throw in my 2 cents; this time I might even say something intelligent. I think you fail to see a few depressing realities. Essentially, you excoriate Tim for failing to enlist to serve in a war which he supports (the same applies to me, incidentally). Geoffrey Blainey pointed out some years ago that war is, essentially, a means of resolving international problems. It isn’t always the only means, but unfortunately there will be times when it is. I think it can be reasonably said that Iraq was one of those times. It posed an “international problem” through its likelihood to commit cross-border aggression (does anyone seriously believe attacks on Kuwait, Israel and Saudi Arabia would not have recurred had a free hand ever been given), its desire to acquire significant weapons technology, and its mind-numbing oppression of its citizens. This problem could, I would argue, only be solved by removal of its government. This solution could only be provided through warfare, as indeed it has been. No other means was likely to achieve it. OK, so the war was necessary, and for its ends the war could be supported. This does not mean the war had to be “liked”. I do not like war. I hate war. I think Tim hates war. I can’t imagine any sane human being who would not hate war. But this doesn’t alter the fact that war had to occur to solve that problem. Ergo, one did not have to like the war to support it. You see, most of us over the age of 5 know that what we like, and what necessity requires, are not always the same thing.

So far, so good. Does this mean the civilian contributors to this blog who supported the war had to enlist? I do not think so, unless our joining up was necessary to achieve the solution described. Because of the pre-war defence forces maintained by the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Poland and Denmark (did anyone but me notice the Danish contribution? It was described in the Washington Times shortly after the fall of Baghdad) our enlistment was not required. There already existed persons (like TJ, above) sufficiently trained, skilled and numerous to effect the solution. These are people I could never dream of being committed or disciplined enough to emulate. I do not see, however, how my own deficient character makes the war itself unjustifiable, or my support for it illegitimate. If that were the case, it would be necessary for me to shut my eyes to every problem I’m not able, personally, to fix. I would prefer to work on the problems of the world that I do have the capacity to contribute to (like inadequate legal representation for the bottom rung of society) that to spend my time wringing my hands over my inability to solve the problems of this wicked world. I leave that to the likes of Phillip Adams.

Posted by: National Party Headcase at January 13, 2004 at 06:01 PM

Quentin! Don't forget the nice chianti!

Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 13, 2004 at 08:26 PM

Some people may actually contribute more to the fight by not picking up a rifle

That would be our Tim. ;-)

Kind of like the way my wife says I can best help out with dinner by staying the f*** out of the kitchen.

Posted by: R C Dean at January 13, 2004 at 10:05 PM

To Angie Schulz;
what do you expect when english is a third language, you racist bitch?
Anyway, wanna go for a drive down the park in my Skyline- it's got a fully sick doof system, we've even got some Kylie on the stacker- don't worry about my 'bros, they're gonna get the bus where I drop them off....

Posted by: Habib at January 13, 2004 at 10:38 PM

"Tim Blair a leading member of the Coward Right. The Coward Right send other people to fight their wars while they stay home and write the blogs and give the speeches."

Coooolllll. Tim's got command of his own army. Who are ya gonna crush next, Tim? Can I command the tank brigade? Huh, can I? Can I?

Posted by: JohnO at January 13, 2004 at 11:17 PM

I have a blog! Where's my army?

A little one would do.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at January 13, 2004 at 11:46 PM

Don't you just love people who hide in anonymity while calling others "cowards?"

Posted by: JorgXMcKie at January 13, 2004 at 11:51 PM


"Yes, Crock of Tim. I'm sure you'll find, if you look back on the casualty figures of previous wars, that 500 casualties is an unusually large number for an army to take when invading a country the size of Iraq."

Unfortunately, whenever you point this out, the standard reply you get is "Tell that to their families!" It's usually said with a triumphant tone, as if the speaker has blown you away with a devastating rhetorical blast, when really they've just demonstrated themselves incapable of dispassionate, logical thought.

Posted by: Dave S. at January 14, 2004 at 12:10 AM

My wife has taken to making Cincinatti-style chili. She's trying to perfect it and so I'm alla time having it in my lunch. I had it for lunch and dinner yesterday, too, and on Sunday for lunch.

Not complaining, mind you.

Posted by: Bovious at January 14, 2004 at 12:19 AM

Angie, I want my 50 points. That's from "Bored of the Rings", Harvard Lampoon.

Funny, just yesterday I was thinking that lunchboy et al must have gotten into some bad mushrooms.

Posted by: Tim Benzedrine at January 14, 2004 at 12:46 AM

TPH wishes Tim and, by extension, the rest of us to just SHUT UP. At least that is the thrust of his strawman argument (no, the term "strawman" is *not* overused, since it's expositors have an almost heroin-junkie attachment to it).

Okay, I'm SHUTTING UP

Really, I am

No, really, I'm shutting up already

[Yosemite Sam voice]

Shut up shuttin' up!

[pause]

My lunch yesterday consisted of tender 3rd World baby veal (that's *baby* veal, not baby *veal*) marinated in it's own malaria-infected blood. A shout out to the environmental hucksters who popularized this previously rare delicacy over the last 40 years.

I need a beer.

Posted by: Tongue Boy at January 14, 2004 at 01:12 AM

I personally find Tim's support of the Austrlian wine and restaurant industries to be a pivotal part of the war effort.

"Rosie the Drunk Gourmand," he is. Keep on truckin' Tim.

Posted by: Bill at January 14, 2004 at 02:59 AM

How many of these leftist idiots who accuse others of cowardice stormed the beaches of East Timor? Oh yeah, that's right, none of them. Weren't they advocating it's liberation for 20 years or so?

Ditto West Papua, how many of these people are over there now fighting with the OPM?

Posted by: Wayne Kerr at January 14, 2004 at 05:40 AM

Sangria with tacos

"If you're not fighting you have no right to support the war." New meme and just about as baseless as most of the others. Timmy boy, some of us WERE in the military, some of us are too old, some of us are too sick, and some of us are doing more to support the war effort at home than we could carrying a rifle. Stop projecting.

Posted by: rabidfox at January 14, 2004 at 05:58 AM

What about LUNCH? Can we still eat it if we don't cook it?

Posted by: Quentin George at January 14, 2004 at 06:49 AM

Rabidfox,

Good call on the sangria. There a Mexican restaurant near me that has over 110 types of tequila, so I have agave on the brain (well, what's left of my brain...).

Posted by: Jerry at January 14, 2004 at 06:57 AM

And let's not forget, if your in a festive mood (because, say, you're out to LUNCH while kids are dying in Iraq), you can always have a margarita with those tacos...

Posted by: Jerry at January 14, 2004 at 06:59 AM

I guess anyone too old or young to join the military can't be for war.

Because, hey. Some other volunteer might die! And that means you can't have opinions. The military must make all military decisions, because we live in a military dictatorship, right? This is the West. We're military dictatorships, because only people in the military can advocate military action. This is Obvious, right? Right? No?

(Does this mean that only people who are not in the military can support not going to war? After all, they can't legitimately support peace, they must be simply exercising cowardice? No? It only works one way? One way that conveniently makes it nearly impossible for anyone to disagree with you without being a coward? Indeed!)

PS. Tacos.

Posted by: Sigivald at January 14, 2004 at 07:03 AM

Habib---What, no Slim Dusty? Well, I'd love to take a dekko at your ute, but I have to do a bit of hard yakka this arvo. I've a daggy paper to finish.

Tim Benzedrine. Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner, and here are your fifty lovely points!

[Wild applause]

And, just for you, here's an incantation that just might keep away the trolls. Works for big sucking plants.

Tim, Tim, Benzedrine!
Hash! Boo! Valvoline!
Clean! Clean! Clean for Gene!
First second, neutral, park,
Hie thee hence, you leafy narc!

Hmmm, leafy. Might only work on trolls who've had salad for lunch.

Posted by: Angie Schultz at January 14, 2004 at 08:48 AM

TPH and other leftoids miss the irony in the clubname,RWDBS.

According to leftoids, any who assert free markets,rule of (common)law, small (if any at all) govts, no `redistribution', are incompassionate, murderous bastards.That it is socialism which has thrown up real savagery, escapes the whiners.
As for comapssion: there is nothing compassionate about the social welfare state either.It is a cruel hoax which keeps a lot of people in barbaric circumstances, as dependents on big almighty govt. and its army of interfereing busy body careerist bureaucrats.

Now, to the war, as a RWDB, one shall say, as with the nanny state, things would be much better if armies and all that is required to support them could be dispensed with. Nor is it pleasant seeing men march off to war.Much better if they did not have to.However, as with the Germans and
WWI ( though the French were as culpable in bringing that about) and, with Japan and Italy also WWII,then the USSR and the very hot Cold War, the commies in Asia-Korean,Vietnam, Malaya and so forth, the cold war,and Saddam Hussein, and Islamo-fascists, war is sometimes the unhappy and nasty recourse becuase the dangers are greater than can be entertained by a position passive.Without Churchill and Britain, the poltical map of Europe would be under one colour, the Swastika.Without the U.S.A. after 1945, it would have been the hammer and sickle of the Soviet Union.

Should add TPH, I have been prepared to serve in war in the past ,now I'm too old for it. Yet, that disposition is not germane at all in agreeing to the decision to fight a just war like the recent war, just as it isn't germane to WWII and also those who did not go to war.

Posted by: d at January 14, 2004 at 08:58 AM

Just FYI, most of our front-line guys are from the south, and southwest, where there is a long tradition of military service. Most of them are white-boys. Not from the midwest. Not from the ghetto. If you cared, you'd know that. You cheapen thier memory with your ignorance of our culture. Again.
As to anyone's being a chicken-hawk, well, everyone's brave on the internet....

Posted by: John at January 14, 2004 at 09:11 AM

hey. did it light up or not.....

No matter what your pathetic fan club splutter in shock horror that someone dares to call you to account, ya still a disgusting coward and I know it makes to turn in angonising guilt that what I say is right on the mark. You dumb ass coward.

You can't even sign up for a stint as an embed on the frontline. You really are a disgrace to our profession.

Posted by: crock of tim at January 14, 2004 at 05:00 PM

-- let's try that again without the typos --

hey. did it light up or not.....

No matter what your pathetic fan club splutter in shock horror that someone dares to call you to account, ya still a disgusting coward and I know it makes you turn in agonizing guilt that what I say is right on the mark. You dumb ass coward.

You can't even sign up for a stint as an embed on the frontline - what are you - a chicken.

You really are a disgrace to our profession.

Posted by: crock of tim at January 14, 2004 at 05:02 PM

-- let's try that again without the typos --

Actually crock, it made more sense with the typos. At least we could blame it on a lack of education. now im forced to conclude you are simply a fuckwit.

Posted by: Quentin George at January 14, 2004 at 07:31 PM

Rant to your heart's delight, crock of tim. But scroll up a few inches.

My posting still stands: What was the *necessity* for Tim or any of we chickenhawks to enlist for the problem to be solved?

Intriguingly, the corollary of your critique of Tim is that if you were not prepared to get yourself to (say) Diego Garcia or Saudi Arabia and start monkeywrenching US military hardware, you had no place opposing the war, since you would not take personal risk to stop it.

Or is it that peaceniks are uniquely permitted to talk without acting? That would be fine by me, incidentally: such an ethic merely underlines your impotence.

Posted by: National Party Headcase at January 14, 2004 at 07:32 PM