• Crocker to Taliban: Youse Guys are Wimps

    April 16, 2012

    Tags: , , ,
    Posted in: Afghanistan, Embassy/State

    Ryan Crocker (seen dropping some killa ninja hand gestures on ‘ya at left), America’s Ambassador to Afghanistan is a dude, dude. He don’t take no sh*t from nobody. Check this smackdown:

    The Taliban, see, launched a wave of assaults on Kabul and three other provinces Sunday. Fighting in the Kabul district that houses allied embassies lasted into Sunday night. Bombs, suicide vests, AKs, the whole MFer.

    So what does America’s bad boy Ambassador have to say to ‘dem Taliban bitches: “The Taliban are very good at issuing statements, less good at fighting.”

    Da Man Crocker, is not the first time he lay smack on the Taliban. Following the all-day Taliban assault on the American Embassy in Kabul last September, Crocker said “If this is the best they can do, I find both their lack of ability and capacity and the ability of Afghan forces to respond to it actually encouraging in this whole transition process.”

    Crock’s bad-ass statements sound tough and cool, like a real manly diplomat should. Freakin’ Taliban, can’t do nothing right. But wait, gee, what’s it been for our war in Afghanistan, heading into ELEVEN FREAKING YEARS Ryan? After eleven years of fighting, trillions of dollars, thousands of lives and umpteen training missions for the Afghans, the Taliban can still stage a coordinated attack in central Kabul? That does not seem like a lack of ability or capability. The victories over the Taliban seem to be taking place closer and closer to home somehow. And how many more Americans have died in Afghanistan in between Crocker’s childish posturing?

    How well did grunting “Bring ‘em on!” work out when George Bush said it regarding Iraq? When he said it, only 23 Americans had died in Iraq. 4479 dead Americans and nine years later, he is still eating those words.

    What is lacking here is credibility. Lacking also is humility. Ryan Crocker, please just shut the freak up.



    (America, please note that my previous blog posting of some seven months ago about Ryan Crocker’s macho posturing was singled out by the State Department’s Diplomatic Security agents as a further example of my “poor judgement” and included in the Report of Investigation filed against me. Boy oh boy, seven more months from now am I gonna be in trouble when the next investigation uncovers this blog posting.)




    Related Articles:




    Copyright © 2020. All rights reserved. The views expressed here are solely those of the author(s) in their private capacity.

    • Recent Comments

    • Ronald said...

      1

      Thanks for your work. I very much admire what you did and what you are continuing to do and you have all our best wishes.
      I’m writing to respond to the unpleasant language you’ve used in your latest Crocker piece for 16 April–today.
      My theory is that the use of obscenities suggests a lack of control. If I had to guess I’d say that the pressure that you’re under is coming out in the lack of control in your language. I could guess that you’d like to strike back at your tormentors, but what is actually happening is that your rage is coming out against your readers, your fans!!!
      Yes, it’s tough, and we’re with you in spirit.
      Hopefully we can continue our conversations.
      Sincerely,
      Ronald

      04/16/12 5:53 PM | Comment Link

    • Lisa said...

      2

      Ronald,

      To risk the presumption of speaking for Mr. Van Buren, which no one can possibly do as well as he himself, I believe he is merely co-opting the vernacular of the day. These are crude times, outside of DoS banquets. He reveals himself to be as in-touch with the world outside as that inside of The Beltway.

      Peter,

      Mr. Crocker seems to be cribbing his gestures from Dana Carvey’s brilliant emulation of GHWB, no? It is PoMo come home to roost.

      04/16/12 6:48 PM | Comment Link

    • jo6pac said...

      3

      Crokers just another cycle-0-path with some power how sad for those the die in name of ?

      04/16/12 8:52 PM | Comment Link

    • Ronald Bleier said...

      4

      Thanks, Lisa. Yes, of course I agree that Van B is totally on target on inside and outside the Beltway. My objections to his salty language is that it’s a distraction to his critique and allows others to dismiss or ignore him. Yes, he’s going thru very difficult personal troubles, but ironically his audience suffers the brunt of his frustration rather than the real malefactors.
      –Ronald

      04/17/12 7:31 PM | Comment Link

    • Administrator said...

      5

      I will reluctantly admit Ronald is mostly correct. I do allow my own anger at what is happening to filter into my posts. That is by choice of course, as this is a personal blog that includes what is happening to me as part of the story. For better or worse, some people are offended by swear words and to the extent that that interferes with the more important messages, I will try to limit them.

      04/17/12 8:39 PM | Comment Link

    • Lisa said...

      6

      Ronald,

      Per your contention that Mr. Van Buren’s verbiage is a “distraction”, I disagree; no one will “dismiss or ignore” PVB.

      Per: “his audience suffers the brunt of his frustration rather than the real malefactors”, we — those privileged to read his thoughts — suffer nothing, though we are witness to the grave injustice playing out here. One would have to live a very cosseted life to find offense here.

      To suggest he alter or muzzle his speech makes you no better than those with whom he is fighting; it is an offense, though I’m sure you mean none. Please see the irony of your position, however.

      Peter: Keep on keeping on, and please do not limit yourself!

      04/18/12 12:46 PM | Comment Link

    Leave A Comment

    Mail (will not be published) (required)