ScrappleFace500.gif
Top Headlines...
:: Bush Now Proposes to 'Public-ize' Social Security
:: Annan Would 'Like to Break' UN Scandal Story
:: Rumsfeld: 'You Go to War with the Senate You Have'
:: Google Brings 'Thrill of Public Library' to Your Desktop
:: MoveOn.org Sues Artist Over Bush Monkey Face
:: NARAL Outraged at Peterson Death Sentence
:: Post-Kerik Withdrawal Syndrome May Cause Paralysis
:: Bush Nominates Nanny to Replace Kerik
:: Energy Nominee Excited to Become Big Oil Croney
:: Bush: Fight High Coffee Prices by Drilling in ANWR

July 23, 2003
Quagmire Index Revised to Reflect Death of Saddam Sons
by Scott Ott

(2003-07-23) -- Now that Saddam Hussein's sons are dead, a panel of journalists has revised the official Iraq Quagmire Index. According to the new benchmark, all violence against Coalition troops should cease immediately, since Uday and Qusay Hussein are gone.

The Quagmire Index is a service journalists provide to establish hopeful expectations for the future. When those expectations are proved wrong by events, reporters and pundits may officially use the term "quagmire" to describe the situation.

Journalists last revised the index when President George Bush declared an end to major combat operations in Iraq. Reporters interpreted this to mean that if any American troops were killed or wounded after that date, then Mr. Bush had lied about the "war" being over, and Iraq was a Vietnam-like quagmire.

Studies of American news consumers show they appreciate the Quagmire Index because it eliminates the need to consider and remember numerous facts. For journalists it saves time, and bypasses the discomfort of careful news analysis.

Donate | | Comments (57) | More Satire | Printer-Friendly |
Buy "Axis of Weasels," the first book by Scott Ott. $12.95 + S&H;
Email this entry to: Your email address:
Message (optional):
Skip to Comments Form

FIRST ONE!!!

Posted by: ARMSTRONGCUI at July 23, 2003 07:40 AM

.

Oops...

Its nice to hear the death of Saddam Hussein's infamous sons, but don't you think its too early to celebrate and rejoice ?.

Let us wait for the result of the DNA test..

.

Posted by: ARMSTRONGCUI at July 23, 2003 07:49 AM

"careful news analysis" -- What is that?

You mean all that stuff like double sourcing stories, avoiding anecdotal reporting in mainstream stories, reviewing officials' statements before 'paraphrasing' them, and avoiding unnamed source writing like the old timers said they did?

Right, just like all the gramps had to walk to school five miles in the snow, uphill both ways.

That careful news analysis stuff went the way of the manual typewriter.

:-)!

Posted by: Jericho at July 23, 2003 07:52 AM

So now the white house has confirmed that the sons of Saddam have been killed. Wow!

So you mean the sons of Saddam themselves couldn't find a tiny little WMD to fight back?

So If I understand correctly,if the white house confirm that they have been killed then it must be true? :-) :-) . You're kidding right!

Who was it again who said:
"reports about my death have been greatly exagerated"

Posted by: frogwatch at July 23, 2003 08:41 AM

Frogwatch, I'm convinced. Four eyewitnesses, 100% match on dental records for one, 90% on the other (lost 10% due to the battle that sent him to his eternal reward), x-ray proof of easily identifiable injuries from former assassination attempt - Yessirree! My sons and I went outside and did some celebratory bb-gun firing into the air. As we say in the Muslim world, al-hamdulillah! (Praise be to God).

I do believe the Iraqi people should be showed the photographs, perhaps the bodies, though. They deserve that much.

Posted by: MathMom at July 23, 2003 08:57 AM

"Who was it again who said:
"reports about my death have been greatly exagerated"
"

Actually, I believe the phrase was "RUMORS of my death have been greatly exagerated".

In other news: There was a small electrical fire on top of the Eifle Tower yesterday morning. Fire officials sent a committe in to verify that there was a fire, after they had verified the fire existed, and got permission from the United Fire Marshalls Security Council, they sent in a team of the very best French Fire Fighters who, once witnessing the conflagration which consumed the switch box, immediately surrendered and considered the Eifle Tower to be a total loss.

Posted by: Evil Midnight Poster what Posts At Midnight at July 23, 2003 09:10 AM

Let me see if I understand. If the NY Times reports the deaths of U. and Q. as a reason to hope that Iraqi resistance will fade, it's those liberal[s]...setting up false expectations.

So if the NY Times were to report that the deaths of U. and Q. were NOT a reason to hope for fading resistance, you'd applaud them for honest journalism? Give me a break.

Posted by: Dizoo at July 23, 2003 09:28 AM

Frogwatch, why take them alive? From what I know of the middle east, once it was known they were alive, their enemies would have killed them and their friends more than likely turned them in for the bounty money...unless the friends were not part of the clan. After deducting the cost of the firefight, the one who tattled may get a couple mil.

Posted by: Cricket at July 23, 2003 09:33 AM

Dizoo, frankly neither conclusion is acceptable for the NYT to report--if for no other reason than it is not reporting. Drawing that conclusion is an editorial comment, not news.

Posted by: The Other Scott at July 23, 2003 09:36 AM

Other Scott, part of the Scrappleface joke about the Quagmire Index was that "For journalists it saves time, and bypasses the discomfort of careful news analysis."

And I don't see that this story went over the line from news analysis to editorializing. Most of it was reporting the analysis of the administration:


"WASHINGTON, July 22 ˇ The deaths of Saddam Hussein's two eldest sons in a battle with American troops in northern Iraq could be an important victory in the campaign to control, and even end, the guerrilla-style insurgency that has almost daily killed or injured allied troops, administration and military officials said today."

So they're reporting what administration and military officials said. What's wrong with that?

Posted by: Dizoo at July 23, 2003 10:05 AM

Well being that 'tis is the joyful season of Christmas in July and in order
to keep in tune with the spirit of the season's best news, let US sing to
the tune of "Deck the Halls":

Deck of Cards

Dead are Qusay 'n Uday.
Trat-at-at-at-Tat-Trat-at-at-at
These two punks got blown today.
Trat-at-at-at-Tat-Trat-at-at-at
By the Hundred First Division.
Trat-at-at-Trat-at-at-Tat-at-at
Both trolls charred to no distinction
Trat-at-at-at-Tat-Trat-at-at-at

Cable News broke it to all US.
Trat-at-at-at-Tat-Trat-at-at-at
'Bout the Strike in downtown Mosul.
Trat-at-at-at-Tat-Trat-at-at-at
Coalition announced with pleasures
Trat-at-at-Trat-at-at-Tat-at-at
Qusay 'n Uday at creator's.
Trat-at-at-at-Tat-Trat-at-at-at

Task Force 20 is in great spirits.
Trat-at-at-at-Tat-Trat-at-at-at
Hail the rounds that got 'em siblings
Trat-at-at-at-Tat-Trat-at-at-at
There's reason o'er optimism.
Trat-at-at-Trat-at-at-Tat-at-at
Deck of cards is surely shrinking.
Trat-at-at-at-Tat-Trat-at-at-at

HO HO HO...Merry Xmas in JULY

Posted by: RHP at July 23, 2003 10:13 AM

frogwatch,

Mark Twain is quoted as having said, "Rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

Posted by: Roo at July 23, 2003 10:33 AM

I retract that statement.

Posted by: Mark Twain at July 23, 2003 10:41 AM

Dizoo, the quote you gave was vastly different in tone than the conclusion points. The actual story's quote I have no problem with--they simply say "it could an important victory in the campaign to control, and even end, the guerrilla-style insurgency". If anything, their statement is kind of a "duh" statement. (or, from the 80's, a no-duh! statement). Note the wording...a victory in the campaign. That it is, not the campaign itself.

Posted by: The Other Scott at July 23, 2003 10:41 AM

Mark Twain,

You can no more retract that statement than tax increases can be made retroactive--oh, wait...forget it.

Posted by: The Other Scott at July 23, 2003 10:42 AM

I must compliment Scott Ott for this, so dead-spot-on as to almost lose its comic value because it's so correct.

Posted by: Go Lance Go at July 23, 2003 11:37 AM

Clinton can certainly sympathize with the "liar" accusations. Still, he is amazing in his ability to find the center and to deflate the rest of the democratic field. Case in point, Bill Clinton on Larry King Live this week:

CLINTON: Well, here's what happens: every day the president gets a daily brief from the CIA. And then, if it's some important issue -- and believe me, you know, anything having to do with chemical, biological or nuclear weapons became much more important to everybody in the White House after September the 11 -- then they probably told the president, certainly Condoleezza Rice, that this is what the British intelligence thought. They maybe have a difference of opinion, but on balance, they decided they should leave that line in the speech.

I think the main thing I want to say to you is, people can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons. We might have destroyed them in '98. We tried to, but we sure as heck didn't know it because we never got to go back in there.

KING: Yes.

CLINTON: And what I think -- again, I would say the most important thing is we should focus on what's the best way to build Iraq as a democracy? How is the president going to do that and deal with continuing problems in Afghanistan and North Korea?

We should be pulling for America on this. We should be pulling for the people of Iraq. We can have honest disagreements about where we go from here, and we have space now to discuss that in what I hope will be a nonpartisan and open way. But this State of the Union deal they decided to use the British intelligence. The president said it was British intelligence. Then they said on balance they shouldn't have done it. You know, everybody makes mistakes when they are president. I mean, you can't make as many calls as you have to make without messing up once in awhile. The thing we ought to be focused on is what is the right thing to do now. That's what I think.

Posted by: KJ at July 23, 2003 01:39 PM

CLINTON: Well, here's what happens: every day the president gets a daily brief from the CIA. Well, every President except me. I stopped taking those briefs in 1994.

Posted by: Jericho at July 23, 2003 01:52 PM

Wow, Clinton actually said that. Well I guess I will have to give him a 1 point raise on his respect level. Still has a ways to go to reach zero though.

Mitch

Posted by: Zen at July 23, 2003 01:57 PM

Whooooooooaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!
First!!!! Yeah!!!!!

Posted by: stoner at July 23, 2003 05:24 PM

whoa!!??!!
wrong page dude.

Posted by: stoner at July 23, 2003 05:26 PM

I hope we get to punch Saddam's (one-way) ticket soon, as well as OBL's. He gets a one-way ticket to his 72 Virginians, who hopefully will beat the living (#$# out of him.

Kim Il Sung, you're next! (with a cruise missile or MOAB, hopefully) Unless you back off on the nuke-talk.

Posted by: Ken Stein at July 23, 2003 05:46 PM

like children putting toys on a wall to explode them with stones, US put his dictators on countries to explode them with missiles.

am I wrong?

Posted by: Max at July 23, 2003 07:52 PM

Max,

Yes.

Posted by: A Consistent Observer at July 23, 2003 08:09 PM

>>>CLINTON: Well, here's what happens: every day the president gets a daily brief from the CIA. Well, every President except me. I stopped taking those briefs in 1994.

Posted by: Jericho on July 23, 2003 01:52 PM

Clinton also added, "I stopped wearing briefs in 1995!"

Posted by: Max Jr. at July 23, 2003 10:44 PM

N.Y. Post---It has been reported today, by our beyond reproach, crack unnamed source, that the smoke eminating from the Eiffel Tower yesterday was from a welder working at the top of the Tower.

Reports are that due to the French economy being hurt by the American boycotts, that the frogs are turning the Eiffel into an oil rig!

Film at 11!

P.S.
[ Please Note: ScrappleFace readers are intelligent enough to express themselves without obscenities. ScrappleFace endeavors to be suitable for all ages. If an obscene interloper posts here, please report the incident to the blogmaster who will delete the comment. (Include the name, date and time of the comment.) So please take that extra moment to think of a civil synonym.]

Posted by: Max's Gay Lover at July 23, 2003 10:50 PM

The French economy being hurt by American Boycotts? You are living in a fantasy world man.
What boycotts?

I guess you hate French people because we didn't believe your president's lies about Irak and you hate to be wrong.

By the way Bush just said that Saddam's regime is gone. He could have added : "and Soon so will be mine".Ha Ha.

Posted by: Frogwatch at July 24, 2003 02:12 AM

To quote the eminent philosopher Bugs Bunny: What a maroon.

Posted by: some random guy at July 24, 2003 09:37 AM

US deaths in Iraq mount.

Our people is getting killed over there for nothing, as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: Johnny at July 24, 2003 09:50 AM

Max,

¦>[

Posted by: kim who slightly resembles Jayne Weintraub at July 24, 2003 01:14 PM

"Reports are that due to the French economy being hurt by the American boycotts, that the frogs are turning the Eiffel into an oil rig!"
dixit Max's Gay Lover


applause, very funny amigo !!!!!
;)


Posted by: La fayette at July 24, 2003 02:05 PM

Max,

Between this wacked out post comparing children's games to US Foreign Poilicy and your inability to revel in the joy of the carnage made from the brothers Hussein, it is clear that your postings are like static; annoying, indistuingably repetative, and devoid of intelligence.

P.S. I've been with your gay lover and he says you're no good in bed.

Posted by: Big Time Sublime at July 24, 2003 03:37 PM

Frogwatch first:
The French economy being hurt by American Boycotts? You are living in a fantasy world man.
What boycotts?

The ones that probably aren't hurting your economy that much. But the high degree of socialism IS hurting your economy, loony!

I guess you hate French people because we didn't believe your president's lies about Irak and you hate to be wrong.

Well... Let's just say that we don't like your "veto ANY resolution about Iraq" approach. If you'd consented to even looking at it first, we wouldn't be so P-O'd. I mean, that is so amazingly craven. I guess YOU don't like losing Saddam's promises for oil, do you? It was about oil. The French, Russians, and Germans wanted to get their hands on it, at the expense of the Iraqi people. And they weren't lies - he said it was based on British intel, and the Brits are saying that their info is correct.

By the way Bush just said that Saddam's regime is gone. He could have added : "and Soon so will be mine".Ha Ha.

Oh, that's so funny - it isn't a regime, you dunderhead! Say, since you're French, why don't you just leave us alone? You can have Alec Baldwin too, BTW. And I personally wish we could get a Libertarian President (minus the part about legalizing drugs), instead of keeping W. But W is the next best thing, and also much more likely to win (this includes the 400 Democrats who are running currently) than a Libertarian.

In short, that's nice, Frogwatch - Bless your heart.

Max: You can't explode things with stones any more than swallows can carry coconuts.

Posted by: Ken Stein at July 24, 2003 05:04 PM

African or European swallows?

Posted by: Max at July 24, 2003 09:22 PM

[Please Note: ScrappleFace readers are intelligent enough to express themselves without obscenities. ScrappleFace endeavors to be suitable for all ages. If an obscene interloper posts here, please report the incident to the blogmaster who will delete the comment. (Include the name, date and time of the comment.) So please take that extra moment to think of a civil synonym.]

Posted by: Max at July 24, 2003 09:23 PM

What if you had two swallows, and the coconut was connected to a vine?

Ken, nice use of the southernisms. You can go ahead and get a drug legalization libertarian president. It'll be ok -- the laws wouldn't change. Congress would still be controlled by the socialist and the less socialist parties.

Posted by: KJ at July 24, 2003 09:46 PM

Ken

I don't get it? you are you for or against Bush ?.

We don't have a "veto ANY resolution about Iraq" approach.
Chirac said we would veto any resolution that would automaticly result in having to declare war on Irak bacause more time was needed for the inspections.(there was nothing to find anayway)

Now you have created this mess in Irak, Good luck to solve it.When you start the reconstruction don't forget to give bullet-proof vests to the engineers and workers that will accept to go there.


Posted by: Frogwatch at July 25, 2003 01:16 PM

There are actually morons out there who don't think the boycott is hurting the French? Read on, Macduff!

By Robert J. McCartney
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, April 16, 2003; Page A32

PARIS, April 15 -- An American backlash against French products and businesses has started to bite, dashing hopes here that appeals in the United States to punish France economically for opposing the war in Iraq would go unheeded.

[Editor's Note: Please don't post entire articles in the comment section. Use hyperlinks. I have deleted the rest of this article.]

Posted by: I Hate Frogistan at July 25, 2003 01:56 PM

Oh, and Frogwatch, you must feel really stupid now that it has been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that Uday and Qusay are dead.

Posted by: I Hate Frogistan at July 25, 2003 02:02 PM

KJ: That's one of the few things I don't agree with them over - drugs. I think they should be illegal, with community service (litter collecting along highways, sidewalk sweeping) for nonviolent drug offenses (the violent ones still go in the slammer.) One of the others is security. I have a feeling that security would be very lax under a Libertarian. Not a good thing. I'd say I'm about halfway between Conservatism and Libertarianism (50% self-government, 100% economic self-government.) I guess who I really want for President is Jack Ryan (if you don't know what I'm talking about, go read Executive Orders, by Tom Clancy)

Frogwatch: See reply to KJ. Then look up GWB's policies, and figure out which I agree with.

You think there wasn't enough time for the inspectors? They were ONLY in there for about 9 years. I was referring to this statement by Chirac: "France will vote 'no' because she considers tonight that there is no reason to wage a war to reach the goal we set ourselves, that is the disarmament of Iraq," (from http://www.xtramsn.co.nz/news/0,,3884-2204560,00.html). So, why does Iraq need disarming, Chirac? I thought you thought it didn't have any weapons. the "automatically having to declare war" is because he knew that Iraq had been in violation of numerous UN Resolutions from the outset, some of them requiring action on violation. And he didn't want to do anything about Iraq, just to talk about it.

And we will succeed in rebuilding Iraq, with or without France. Too bad France won't have anything to do with it.

Posted by: Ken Stein at July 25, 2003 02:34 PM

Froggie - Nice to see a mindless maroon here on this blog. Keeps the rest of us involved.

There were no boycotts - officially - only PO's Americans refusing to buy Frog products. Who can blame them? Chirac and his toadies in Germany & Belgium can't stand it that some country has the stones to do something about murderous sh_theels. And they have now lost their economic concessions with Saddam & his bully boys. Too bad . . . Hear That?

That is the worlds tiniest violin playing just for Froggies and twerps like Max.

Posted by: Tex at July 25, 2003 03:00 PM

I'm more than happy to let France take some bullets as we help rebuild Iraq. But if you rely on the French to do the building, be prepared to wait. It is hard to rebuild a country on 30 hours per week and 16 weeks of strikes per year.

Posted by: KJ at July 25, 2003 03:52 PM

You forgot the months of paid maternity leave. And the cradle-to-grave government involvement in private life. And the high taxes that are stifling the French economy. And the socialized healthcare that is stopping advancement because of reduced economic incentives to work. And the unemployment benefits that are better than some jobs, so people don't try to get a job. Talk about Big Brother.

Posted by: Ken Stein at July 25, 2003 11:54 PM

"American backlash is starting to bite..."

I guess so. Balance of trade with France in March was PLUS $200 billion for France. By the end of April, it was MINUS $100 billion, and dropping...

A shift of $300 billion in some 45 days... without ARY a word of encouragement from US Gummint mouth-musicians. Just normal Americans voting with their wallets.

April, May, June, we're nearing the end of July, right? Wow! I'll bet it is one FLETCH of a pinch in France by now. Lets see, how can I say this politely?

Serves you right.

Posted by: SharpShooter at July 26, 2003 03:30 AM

http://landview.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c4279.html

Seems to me imports are in line with 2002?
I wonder where you get your sources of info.

You guys are just jealous of our 30 hrs week, 16 weeks of strike and 30 days vacations.
Be more productive, maybe you will have time to enjoy life too.

And also, I never said Oudai and Qusai were not dead. I just said that I don't believe info from the clown you have in the white house anymore.

Posted by: Frogwatch at July 26, 2003 08:05 AM

Not having to work makes a country head down the tubes. As you have been doing. I hope you enjoy paying your confiscatory (for those of you in France, Rio Linda, or Palm Beach, that means very high) income taxes too.

Posted by: Ken Stein at July 26, 2003 08:20 PM

What will DNA prove? Nothing. Look at OJ.

To me the pictures didn't look anything like Hooday and Yousay. So it is a lie to bolster flagging troop morale. It won't work.

Posted by: M. Simon at July 27, 2003 10:50 AM

OJ had Johnny Cochrane to defend him. Queasy and Odious do not, and the death penalty has already been administered. The best way of defending this would be to send DNA to many different firms for analyzing. Then compare results.

Posted by: Ken Stein at July 27, 2003 10:08 PM

"So If I understand correctly,if the white house confirm that they have been killed then it must be true? :-) :-) . You're kidding right!

Who was it again who said:
"reports about my death have been greatly exagerated""

No, you never stated it directly because, like most Frenchies, you don't have the [courage] to do so. You just made an implication that you could weasel out of if proven wrong. What a coward.


"You guys are just jealous of our 30 hrs week, 16 weeks of strike and 30 days vacations.
Be more productive, maybe you will have time to enjoy life too."

HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!


Does 11% unemployment count for productive in your country? Check out our productivity vs yours and you'll see why we're kicking your [tail]. Too bad, so sad. Bubye!

Posted by: Lance at July 28, 2003 12:36 PM

You will never get it unless you come to live in France for a while: We don't care if we are not a superpower. Our ego is not as big as yours.

Now talking about productivity:

cost of war in Irak for you: 70 Billion $
http://www.costofwar.com/
result: about 7000 casualties if you count coalition and Iraki deaths. A probable futur new islamic regime in the middle east (great!)
and 0 WMD!

cost of war in Irak for France: 0 Euro;
result: No more bombs when I take the metro.
For a change,the arabs are giving us a break since they are now all so busy trying to annoy you.+ The image of France is improved.

Posted by: Frogwatch at July 28, 2003 03:27 PM

Frogwatch, are you kidding? The only reason France is playing its political games is b/c its status in the UN is the ONLY way it can pretend to be a superpower anymore.

The lives of Iraqis fighting for Saddam don't count. For anything.

And the cost of the war for France is actually quite large. Cost is not just measured in dollars going out. It is also measured in the lack of dollars coming in. France is losing millions b/c it doesn't have that brutal killing machine dictator to buy and sell with anymore, which is why France opposed the war to begin with.

Posted by: KJ at July 28, 2003 05:47 PM

For a change,the arabs are giving us a break since they are now all so busy trying to annoy you.+ The image of France is improved.

and you say that there was no reason to take out iraq. look what you said you idiot.


in my own insanity

butthead

Posted by: butthead at July 28, 2003 11:10 PM

Frogwatch: How about some productivity, not war? War is meant to remove things, not produce things. You use it to remove things, then produce things after. And guess what? We actually work, and export more food than we import. We even have to pay farmers to plough some of their crops under so that we can handle the volume and keep the price high enough that the farmers can stay alive. We do not tie our country up in knots all the time striking - instead, we work and create wealth. And France hasn't been a superpower in a long time. Saying you don't care is like saying that you wouldn't take more pay, if you were offered it. It's stupid.

Posted by: Ken Stein at July 28, 2003 11:44 PM

[deleted]

Posted by: Lance kicked your butts! at July 29, 2003 10:00 AM

do you know that the Tour de France is an international challenge?

mailto:froggiessuck@franceisfullofwimps.com
i want to say 'va te faire foutre connard', but this is forbidden by the blog rules, so i don't say it.

Posted by: Max at July 29, 2003 07:30 PM

That's a good point. Lance not only beat the French, he beat EVERYONE!! Hehe

Posted by: Lance kicked your butts! at July 29, 2003 11:39 PM

LKYB: As well as that, if France spent $70,000,000,000, it would destroy their economy.... oh never mind, it's already destroyed.

Posted by: Ken Stein at July 30, 2003 02:57 PM