Lifting Iraq to the Big O.

War is a man's game... at least that's the impression I got from reading that the Pentagon has three basic options for dealing with the conflict in Iraq (http://tinyurl.com/vqmwp): increase the size of our force, reduce size and aim for endurance, or pull out. Maybe I'm a pervert (and not just for this opinion), but these options sound a tad phallic to me, as if we were doing the dirty with Iraq but aren't quite able to, uh, satisfy her. 'Tis a nasty analogy, but one that is ironically fitting, and where's why. 1. No Foreplay. In sticking with the analogy, Rummy promised a quickie followed by praise and accolades. In my experience, that only works if the partner has been properly worked up, either mentally or physically. Such was not the case with Lady Iraq and often neither size nor stamina can counter the negative effects of an early and impulsive full military penetration. 2. She's no virgin. Ours are not the first soldiers to invade the land between two rivers. She's seen and done things we've only read about in magazines. Woman like that can't be satisfied with just size and/or stamina. We need to switch positions, try different tools, bring in another partner, something to keep her rising to victory and hope she doesn't need something more kinky, dirty, or rough than we're willing to perform. 3. Bragging Rights. Why are we so intent on getting Iraq to scream out in joy of liberty? Sure, we want continued access to her full, huge fields, but more importantly, we want to be able to brag that we got the job done. We want all our friends to know. We want her to tell everyone she knows. We want everyone to hear the grand orgasm of democracy and compare it to the muffled whimper of theocracy. Without that, our strong and enduring force offers a grand but nearly impotent spectacle. All that said, I'm not necessarily saying we should pull out. Certainly there is a possibility of achieving a climax in this hot and sticky encounter, but how far are we willing to go to reach it? In the context of this analogy, I suspect there is little our phallo-minded military planners would rule out. But who said the analogy was accurate? Actually, it is inherently flawed. How? Well, if you'll recall, Iraq invaded Kuwait and was subsequently forced to pull out. So that means... Not that there's anything wrong with that, but certainly it's fun to point out there are multiple ways to spin the options. And both of these ways seem to fit the homophobic mindset of conservative hawks and military leaders.

Shoutback: Pentagon May Suggest Short-Term Buildup Leading to Iraq Exit CateGoogles: political_silliness Mood = silly