Bush Curses Hezbollah

In a supposed open-mike gaffe, Bush tells Tony Blair a solution to our brewing little World War III (or IV, or V, depending on your predilections): "What they need to do is to get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this [expletive]."

Guess the expletive, win a pony....

Comments

R C Dean | July 17, 2006, 12:59pm | #

World War IV.

World War III was the Cold war.

This is just another campaign in the war with the Islamists.

Xmas | July 17, 2006, 12:59pm | #

Well, it's easy. Besides, the Ireland Online article about the gaffe tells you what the expletive is.

Pro Libertate | July 17, 2006, 1:00pm | #

My predilection is the Crimean War, Mark II :) Why? Why not?

Sounds like a reasonable complaint by Bush. Even as annoying as he and his administration can be, it's a stoic president indeed that doesn't spend some of his time frustrated by the nonsense that is the Middle East.

abc | July 17, 2006, 1:02pm | #

Bush is such a retard. It's like he has no input into whether "they can get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit." It's like me watching TV with a bottle of beer, flipping between shows, seeing the unrest in the middle east, and saying, "jesus, can't they get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit?"

Yochanan | July 17, 2006, 1:06pm | #

Who in the world said WWV? WWIV I can understand and the link to the Podhoretz piece makes sense for IV, but you have it linked under V. Why?

Clean Hands | July 17, 2006, 1:08pm | #

What exactly do you expect Bush to do, then, abc? Explicitly add the "...or else we'll have to go thump them on the head," or what?

joe | July 17, 2006, 1:09pm | #

RC, you flatter them by equating them to the German/Austrian/Ottoman alliance, the Axis powers, and the Warsaw Pact.

Even if you stretch "Islamist" to include secular Arab nationalists, the total might of our enemies doesn't even add up to North Korea 1950, nevermind the entire Soviet Empire.

Postmodern Sleaze | July 17, 2006, 1:11pm | #

To quote a friend of mine (Jay Reding over at www.jayreding.com):

"I’m quite disappointed in the President. He was in Russia for heaven’s sake. To the Russians, cursing is an art form! If you’re going to go for it, go for it. What President Bush should have said is:

'See, the f*cking irony of this completely f*cked up sh*t is what they really f*cking need to do is to get those goat-humping bastards in Syria and their limped-dicked prick of an a*shole President to get those terrorist donkey-raping motherf*ckers in Hezbollah to stop doing this f*cking sh*t. Yob tvoyu mat’, blya!'

That would have greatly impressed the Russians."

Brian Doherty | July 17, 2006, 1:13pm | #

Yochannon--Because if WWIV already began, as per that link, and if this is a new war (which, yes, he'd probably argue this is merely a new battle in an ongoing war, to which I say, we might as well say it's a continuation of the Israeli/Philistine war), then this is WW V.

Phileleutherus Lipsiensis | July 17, 2006, 1:13pm | #

One could make argument that it would be WWVI.

WWI - Seven Years' War

WWII - French Revolutionary & Napoleonic Wars

WWIII - What is generally referred to as WWI.

WWIV - What is generally referred to as WWII.

WWV - Cold War

WWVI - The next World War.

Ken Shultz | July 17, 2006, 1:13pm | #

The first world war was the Seven Years' War, making this World War V. ...which, I maintain, is against terrorism rather than fundamentalist Islam.

...and I'm glad to see the word "supposed" there.

Brian Doherty | July 17, 2006, 1:16pm | #

Yochanan---I apologize for misspelling your tag.

SR | July 17, 2006, 1:19pm | #

Although if we're counting the Napoleonic Wars, then arguably we should count the War of the Spanish Succession, since it also had some notable extra-European engagements: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Spanish_Succession

Joaquin | July 17, 2006, 1:20pm | #

Well, President Bush is a grown man and the expletive was well placed. This can all be avoided if Syria is put in its place and Hezbollah is taken out of southern lebanon.

Warren | July 17, 2006, 1:22pm | #

Poopies

where's my pony?

Phileleutherus Lipsiensis | July 17, 2006, 1:23pm | #

SR,

Well, you could also claim (as some scholars have) that the Seven Years' War, the warfare involved in the American Revolution & the French Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars were all part of the Second Hundred Years' War.

the other Mark | July 17, 2006, 1:23pm | #

World War IV was the last watchable one. Stallone hasn't done anything worthwhile since.

Wait, what?

Ken Shultz | July 17, 2006, 1:25pm | #

I'm thinkin' Napoleonic Wars, and I was tryin' to think of an Asian component. Did French forces go over Urals? ...and then I think, the Ottomans!

...I always forget the Ottomans. You the man, P.L.

Phileleutherus Lipsiensis | July 17, 2006, 1:29pm | #

Ken Shultz,

There were some naval campaigns in the Indian ocean and maybe some actual fighting on land in India.

bob | July 17, 2006, 1:33pm | #

Mitten?

Pro Libertate | July 17, 2006, 1:33pm | #

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Give the Ottomans their empire back, sans their European possessions, and all will be well with the world.

Provided, of course, that they understand that it's not Istanbul, it's Constantinople.

Phileleutherus Lipsiensis | July 17, 2006, 1:34pm | #

Admittedly though, how wars are categorized and named is pretty arbitrary.

And in the Second Hundred Years' War scenario I should have added that the starting point should wars conducted by Louis XIV - such as the War of the League of Augsburg.

Downward | July 17, 2006, 1:35pm | #

The first one speaks for itself, the second one had Tom Cruise in it.....I must have missed the third and fourth War of the Worlds.

Franklin Harris | July 17, 2006, 1:41pm | #

"Word War III"??? That's the one where Rock Hudson was president, right?

NoStar | July 17, 2006, 1:44pm | #

I have long suspected that Reagan's little joke made in front of a supposably dead, but actually live microphone ("The missiles have been launched..") was a calculated ploy in the game of chicken that was the Cold War. The only way to win a game of chicken is for the other guy to think you are crazy enough not to back down.

It worked for Ronnie. Gorby allowed the wall to be torn down. If Bush-lite plays up his shoot first and ask questions later cowboy image, he could get Syria to pull back their trained dogs.

Pro Libertate | July 17, 2006, 1:47pm | #

NoStar,

Nuke the Moon.

NoStar | July 17, 2006, 1:54pm | #

Pro L,
In an insane world, it is crazy not to be nuts.

APL | July 17, 2006, 1:59pm | #

Provided, of course, that they understand that it's not Istanbul, it's Constantinople.

Why did Constantinople get the works?

P Brooks | July 17, 2006, 2:00pm | #

What about the French and Indian War? France and India are a long way apart.

SR | July 17, 2006, 2:03pm | #

"Why did Constantinople get the works?"

That's nobody's business but the Turks.

Phileleutherus Lipsiensis | July 17, 2006, 2:07pm | #

P Brooks,

The French and Indian war was part of the Seven Years' War, or vice versa (the former was a little longer than the latter).

Rick Barton | July 17, 2006, 2:18pm | #

Ya know, it's possible that the overheard comment was meant to be "overheard".

IraeliPalestinianMan | July 17, 2006, 2:36pm | #

If he knew the mic was on, then it may have been a clever bit of theatre to get the Iranians to relax a bit.

If he didn't, it is disheartening to think that he thinks the buck stops with syria and not Iran.

Eitherway, don't talk with you mouth full. Especially in a room full of cameras.
And I for one want to see this sweater that blair supposedly picked out for Bush, i thought that was Condi's job.

boone | July 17, 2006, 2:40pm | #

Postmodern Sleaze, I hearby nominate you for Presidential speechwriter.

Borovan | July 17, 2006, 2:40pm | #

What's really funny is that CNN is playing the clip unedited, with a newscaster repeating the president's comment for good measure:

http://www.youtube.com/v/vwS86Oaemh8

I guess the newsworthiness of presidential pronouncements, even those (alledgedly) not intended for public consumption, supersede the usual language restrictions.

Brian Doherty | July 17, 2006, 2:46pm | #

Rick Barton---Yup, I think so too. Note the word "supposed" in my post.

Rick Barton | July 17, 2006, 3:06pm | #

Brian,

Gotcha. You're hep to the trip. I should read more carefully.

Petunia Picklehead | July 17, 2006, 3:08pm | #

Ken, Phileleutherus Lipsiensis

Actually, I think it's WWVII, if you count the 30 years war and the 100 years war.

Pro Libertate | July 17, 2006, 3:16pm | #

Until every country on the planet joins in a warfare-filled extravaganza, I refuse to accept that we've actually had a "World War". Oooh, ten countries from diverse continents were in a war--why, it must be a "World" War! No, not really.

Don't even bother me until we have at least two hundred nation-states shooting at each other. Then, maybe, we can talk.

F'in Librul | July 17, 2006, 3:24pm | #

terrorist donkey-raping motherf*ckers

I think you meant donkey-raping sh*teaters.

As a southerner who was taught table manners, I'm less horrified by the expletive coming out of the president's mouth than by the fact that he chews with his mouth open and that he speaks while chewing, tossing food into his mouth as if it's some sort of garbage disposal.

VM | July 17, 2006, 3:43pm | #

Rick - now Depeche Mode's cover of Route 66 is now in my head.

:)

cheers!

R C Dean | July 17, 2006, 4:05pm | #

which, I maintain, is against terrorism rather than fundamentalist Islam.

An academic distinction until fundamentalist Muslims do something about the terrorists acting in their name.

SR | July 17, 2006, 4:34pm | #

"An academic distinction until fundamentalist Muslims do something about the terrorists acting in their name."

Ooh! This looks like a fun game:

1946: An academic distinction until Zionist Jews do something about the terrorists acting in their name.

1976: An academic distinction until Catholic Northern Irish do something about the terrorists acting in their name.

1986: An academic distinction until Black South Africans do something about the terrorists acting in their name.

Play along, kids!

peachy | July 17, 2006, 4:51pm | #

If you count simply geographical spread of the action, any of the following could as easily be called a world war as WWI (it's true that Japan fought on the side of the Allies, but their direct contribution was limited - there was less actual fighting in the Asian/Pacific theatre in WWI than in most of the conflicts below)

- Anglo-Spanish conflict (approx 1568-1603)
- Thirty Years War
- War of the League of Augsburg
- War of Spanish Succession
- War of Austrian Succession
- Seven Years' War
- War of American Independence
- Wars of the First through Sixth Coalitions/French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars (note that the War of the Seventh Coalition was the 'Hundred Days', not enough time for fighting to spread beyond Europe)

Now, by PL's definition, WWII is the only reasonable candidate; technically, most of the world outside the main antagonists was either co-belligerent, a colony of a belligerent power, or occupied, even if the Americas, most of Africa, and large chunks of Asia were never the site of any actual fighting. (Historical trivia for the day : did you know that a Brazilian Expeditionary Force fought with the Allies in Italy?)

VM | July 17, 2006, 4:52pm | #

2006: an academic distinction until Stevo gets the zipper to his Bertrand Russell costume fixed, thereby enabling some naughty snugglebunnies to take place with the blow-up Noam Chomsky doll.
2006: an academic distinction until the lusty coeds act out the sweaty pillow fight scene on page 69 (from the leatherbound verion of "Heather has two Mommies").
2006 an academic distinction until Mr. Steven Crane returns to drench us in more owl-related hilarity and mirth.

you're right! it's a lot of fun! :)

(pours second drink of the afternoon)

mediageek | July 17, 2006, 5:47pm | #

Point out which war after 1945 was fought with sticks and rocks and I'll show you WWIV.

/too obscure?

SR | July 17, 2006, 6:04pm | #

Einstein.

Geof | July 17, 2006, 6:19pm | #

Is it just me, or is simply fascinating to hear the two most powerful men in the world caught in a candid moment talking war and peace?

Bingo Little | July 17, 2006, 6:55pm | #

It's amazing that the president saying "shit" is considered to be headline news.

NoStar | July 17, 2006, 6:58pm | #

To bad Bush-lite didn't follow up his remark with "And if Kim Jong Il wants nukular weapons so bad, maybe we should send him some."

Math Guy | July 17, 2006, 7:02pm | #

Is the FCC going to fine Dubya now? I think the current maximum fine for saying naughty words is $500,000.

Rick Barton | July 17, 2006, 10:26pm | #

Thanks VM!

I didn't know that Depeche Mode did a cover of Route 66. I'll listen to it. I really like DM. And interesting...The lyrics given for the DM cover do indeed say: "If you get hip to this kind of trip And go take that california trip"
While the lyrics given for the Stones cover are: "Would you get hip to this kindly tip
And go take that california trip"

In common parlance, I always say: "hep to the trip" as in "Are you hep?" Maybe I'll change it to "hip to the trip." Whatdya think?

Rock on, VM!

VM | July 18, 2006, 10:48am | #

woohoo, Rick!

http://www.musicmademe.com/show_sng.php?d=47464

that's DM's cover!

go for it!

in the name of Old School Punk, CHEERS!
VM

Rick Barton | July 18, 2006, 4:19pm | #

VM,

And New Wave too!