DISQUS

The Washington Independent: Sources Holler Back: Kilcullen Edition

  • elviselvisberg · 1 year ago
    Just to be clear, do you think that including the quotation was simply a discourteous thing to do? That I'd understand, and of course that's a valid concern. Kilcullen's obviously done quite a lot of great work. No reason to cause him unnecessary headaches. I don't see why printing it could be considered unethical, though. If he said it on the record, we're quite a ways from Jayson Blair or Judy Miller or anything here.
  • ajm8127 · 1 year ago
    I agree with your reasons for printing the quotation. He does not deny making the comment, and it speaks like a punch in the face. I thought that it exemplified his frustration and willingness to bring a little critical thinking into the realm of counterinsurgency. I still managed to get all of the points in the article presented in the manual. Especially the one about negotiations being two way streets.
  • pajarito · 1 year ago
    I've been trying to make the point to my step-kids: profanity in conversation distracts from your point. Use language effectively and you don't need to spew profanity as a substitute for meaningful words. Clearly, Kilcullen has some meaningful words on the topic.



    Good mea culpa, especially with the exposure to more of Kilcullen's words and thoughts.
  • spencer_ackerman · 1 year ago
    @elviselvisberg, I think, in hindsight, it was worse than discourteous, it was counterproductive to the point of writing a piece about the handbook. That's notwithstanding @ajm8127's reading, which I do appreciate. And @pajarito is giving good advice to his/her stepkids, although clearly I am a hypocrite here given my foul foul mouth.