« links for 2006-10-23 | Main | Darfur: Now's The Time »

Axis of Evil Joins Coalition of the Willing

Bill Maher speaking of the Iraq Study Group:
"James Baker, says we're going to have to bring in Iran... So this is so bad now that we have to bring in the Axis of Evil to be the coalition of the willing." Oh yes, and Rep Barney Frank (D) Mass nails Stephen Moore on his making shit up.

Quicktime Video 4.77 MB : 5'52
Quicktime 7 required
Real Time with Bill Maher



I'm assuming it would've borne no fruits to tell Moore to wipe that dishonest smirk off of his face. Honestly, he's a salesman (or at least is following the mentality), and the standard reaction to discomfort is to laugh at it as though it were a puppy that's whining. Why didn't they point him out for this mask?

Thanks for posting these Maher excerpts.

Moore's "arguments" are so half-baked, Barney Frank just wasted him. It's good to see somebody tackle the BS straight-out.

I'm sorry - does Bill really think Saddam should be back in power? Honestly?

Hey Costanza! Shut up!

you know that lancet study that says 655,000 or whatever iraqi's died, well even if that number is off by a factor of ten or something, its still worse than under saddam. the study compared the number of deaths under saddam to the number after the invasion, the 655,000 number is extra deaths, not total deaths. whichever number you choose our invasion caused many more iraqis to die, and it caused countless other problems. its just not simple enough to go around toppling dictatorships (especially with no plan), at some point you have to decide, yes these are bad people but containment is the only option. removing saddam from power hurt iraq, it hurt america, it may end up sparking a larger regional sunni/shiite conflict with iraq as a proxy. and besides, even though saddam was bad, there are worse people, worse humanitarian situations we are ignoring. his abuses happened more than ten years ago (the infamous massacre of the kurds was in the 80's while we were still allies), while there are actual emergencies going on, like in darfur.

it seems abundantly obvious to me that the world would be better off with saddam in power.

I don't think anyone thinks we should put Saddam BACK in power now. I think a lot of people think we should have left him and his crazy country ALONE to begin with. Afghanistan was where we needed to put our efforts.

Billions of dollars and thousands of lives lost to take him out of power. For what?

No, Maher isn't saying Sadam should be back in power - he's saying (and the reports from the field support) that the losses Americans and Iraqi have suffered were not worth the benefit of taking Sadam out.

Stating that Maher would prefer that Saddam were in power is a gross mischaracterization. It's the kind of spin the pro-stay-in-Iraq forces try to put on "peaceniks."


Well, this is how I see it. Saddam was no prize, and I'm glad that he's gone. But at what cost? Now the whole region is in flames, anti-American sentiment is so high, and as Frank (D-MA) said, we have no pull, diplomatically or militarily around the world. So the question is, was it worth it? We've been no better. More Iraqis have died due to our presence.

Well honestly, Iraq was a safer place with Saddam in power than with the US in "power". Really it was...


As bad as Saddam clearly was the truth is that LESS innocent civilians died per week in Iraq under Saddam's dictatorship than since the US's illegal invasion.

More info here.

He was under the thumb of the US, he was in their eye. Ever since his deposing without a workable backup plan it's been a clusterfuck over there.

The blood of innocent Iraqi civilians who did nothing wrong other than to be born in the wrong place at the wrong time and the blood of soldiers who died for a lie, for a poorly planned lie, who died so that Cheney and Halliburton and the Bush family and the Carlyle group could get fatter and richer is on the hands of every sucker who bought Bush's bullshit rhetoric and smear campaign in 2004.

No Saddam shouldn't be BACK in power, he should never have left unless they had a good workable plan and replacement for the day after the statues came down.

Iraq was easily controlled and it was no terrorist nation, not by a long shot.

Of course I'm glad he's gone but I'm sad that this administration is so utterly retarded that they thought that once he was gone they could open McDonalds and StarBucks on every corner one week later.

And by the way Saddam's not really gone either, see he's like a Hydra all these guys are. Sure you chopped off the head but the tentacles of Saddam cancer spread much futher than just one pack of cards. If you really want Saddam gone you have to erase his memory and to do that your only option is genocide. You want to 'win' in Iraq? You really want to 'win'? Then you have to "kill every man, woman and child in Iraq, down to the lizards! And may George W. Bush drink the blood of every man, woman and child in Iraq."

Peace through superior firepower, it's the American way right?

Now obviously I'm not painting everyone with the same brush, nor is the somewhat Borat inspired rant a response to any one person but rather to the amorphous and shadowy blob of conservative and hillbilly voters who ensured that while their country was politically red Iraq would be literally red as its streets wash crimson with the blood of the innocent Iraqi and coalition.

Well what comes next? Surely you don't have enough ill educated lower income teens cum cannon fodder to last forever.

Yeehah you fucking rednecks, have you got the stomach to do what you must realise deep down has to be done in order to achieve your evil bloodthirsty money hungry goals?


Then stop fucking with the world.

Here endeth the angry midnight rant.

Chris Murphy, you need to listen to the question to which Bill was responding -- i.e., "Do you think the world would be a better place if Saddam were still in power?" Bill's response was "Absolutely!"

The question wasn't whether or not he should be reinstated as president, which obviously at this point is not an option and would only cause greater chaos in Iraq.

Under Saddam, however, that country was far more stable; and had the US not invaded, not nearly as many people would have died or had their world's turned upside down. Most Iraqis would live with a sense of security and normalcy today.

So, yes, the world would be a better place, at least insofar as American troops, their families, and most Iraqis are concerned. Sadly, though, the damage is done.

In all honesty, if Saddam were back in power things WOULD be a lot better in Iraq.

I don't agree with a lot of the things that Saddam did while in power, but at least he maintained order.

The rape rooms, the abduction, etc...these things WERE terrible, but just take a look at what we have now.

Today we have hundreds of civilians, along with members of the coalition, being killed every single week by roving bands of armed religious militiamen and people planting IED's.

Do you think that ever would have been permitted while Saddam was in power? No. He may have been a really bad dude, but at least his people knew to keep out of his way.

He may have ruled by fear, but hey, it worked.

I really do hate to say that I would rather he be back in power, but it really is the lesser of two evils in this case.

Only George W. Bush could fuck Iraq up so badly that people would actually think of bringing Saddam back.


"Only George W. Bush could fuck Iraq up so badly that people would actually think of bringing Saddam back."

Exactly. Democrats go on the defensive when they get asked if they would prefer Saddam in power. But it should be Bush who has to prove that things are really better than they were with Saddam there. It shouldn't be that hard to show that you've outgoverned Saddam, and yet its appears that Bush's occupation has failed to do it. The right-wing is trying to get their opponents to make their case for them. I for one am not going to do it. The pro-war crowd should have to show us how it's better without Saddam. I'm waiting to see the evidence.

And there we have it: "Only George W. Bush could fuck Iraq up so badly that people would actually think of bringing Saddam back."

The perfect response to anyone who bullies those who would dare to question the validity and usefulness of prolonged and bloody street war in Iraq.

Only George Bush could make Saddam Hussein seem like a better option.

Barney Franks impresses me with his logic and debating skills. Nice to see.

with the situation so inflamed as it is now, not even a monster like saddam could "put the lid back on" in iraq.

they were right, it is going to take a monster like iran. a brutal theocracy and breeding grounds for religious intolerants.

one may wonder how iraq would have faired had saddam hussein died of natural causes and no outside forces intervened, would a sectarian civil war still have erupted? or would saddam's next-in-line taken over? is it completely impossible to imagine a peaceful transition from saddam for iraq?

-- oskar

I like this Barney Franks guy. I was impressed, although Moore pretty much set himself up mulitple times to get knocked down.

Moore didn't have a chance-all he has are talking points and made up BS. His constant tactic was to change subjects and make silly accusations.

Good for Barney Frank. We need more Dems like him! The GOP could use a few folks with his logic as well; it would bring more debate and less crapola to what is currently considered political forum.


But it is possible to oppose how the war has turned out without getting all nostalgic for the good old days under a tyrannical regime, is it not?

The disingenuous list of casus belli was astounding. The seeming lack of a clear plan before the invasion was shocking. The numbers of (probably avoidable) civilian deaths since the invasion is appalling. The myriad other tyrannical regimes which are being ignored is deplorable. But in no way should all of this add up to an isolationist policy.

As the great man said, "the choice before human beings is not, as a rule, between good and evil but between two evils".

This is the second clip of this particular show I've seen and Jason Alexander has yet to say a word.


Support this site

Google Ads

Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives