RoP ma.

'militants' ... ditto.

.. scare "quotes" ... 'priceless'

This is the third major attack on tourists by rebels in the past 10 days.

Yeah, right. Rebels. They can't be called what they are - islamofascist terrorists? Guess the Deutsche Presse-Agentur uses the same styleguides as Reuters.

hurling powerful grenades on helpless tourists: sanctioned by the Religion of MoHamMad (tm).

OT, but too good to let go by...

Check out

Ted Kennedy: Build 'Wind Farm' Elsewhere

[Link: www.newsmax.com...]

I've got a great idea: Let's build it in his front yard. That way, we wouldn't ruin his back yard.

Huh, my view of that link clearly says suspected Muslim militants [emphasis added realwest]

Just when Jammie was going to make a pilgrimage to Jammu, this shi- happens.

Fu--ing activists.

The West Bengalese must have troops in Iraq.

More from the "the religion of peace"

Relax...I'm sure John Murtha right on top of this.

"suspected Muslim militants"

Sooner or later those on the bloody border are going to have to agree to disagree and take it to the back alley for resolution.

I'm sure the media will be all over this clear violation of the rules of warfare for the next several years.

/not really

Does it ever bother anyone in the MSM that they report these intentional attacks on civilians, daily, with the same gusto they report a fender bender on I-5?

Not that Haditha is a proud moment in American military history, it's not, but the double standard is appalling and obvious.

I still think it's a bunch of Amish seperatists myself.

#10 DesertSage

Na, those are Murtha's "freedom fighters"

Remember, it's all the pressure that Pres. Bush has put them under.

10 DesertSage
Oh, hell! NOW you got me worried. :0

Realwest - the article starts with 'suspected muslim militants' (at least without the quotes) and winds up just calling them rebels.

That's the problem with so much of the MSM domestic and international - they are unwilling to call things as they are - preferring to make them as they want to be.

After all, they don't want to atagonize those 'rebels' and 'suspected muslim militants' by being politically incorrect. (Are they worried they might get an email death threat?)

Islam, in all its gory is breaking out all over the world. Getting hard to ignore, is it not? When is the U.S. administration & State Dept. going to name the enemy? Islam. Not a "tiny minority", or "radical Muslims" or Wahabbis, or any other flavor- it is pure Islam in action.

#12 Beagle - With all due respect my friend, let's wait until the investigation is complete before we comment about Haditha.

The Religion of Terrorism (ROT) strikes again.

#17

Agreed,

It is a "religion of pieces", rather than peace!

#18 realwest

I did.

Sounds bad, pending more investigation and a trial. I'm willing to give them the presumption of innocence, unlike so many people who only give it to certain, select defendants.

#17 spam spam spam spam

Not a "tiny minority", or "radical Muslims" or Wahabbis, or any other flavor- it is pure Islam in action.

Relax...Hillary will be president in '08 and she will put a stop to all this craziness (with a little help from Murtha)!

#21 Beagle - sorry, link didn't work for me. All I know for sure is that "innocent" civilians died. I do know that the three officers "relieved" of their commands have been exonerated and that the CNN correspondent embedded with this Marine unit found it unbelivable that these guys just mowed down a bunch of innocent civilians.
Probably what your link says and if so I apologize.

#16 Athos - We don't really have an argument here; if it was AP, AFP or Al-Reuters the word "Muslim" would never have appeared.

O'Reilly had Cundi on tonight - talking about Iraq among other things. She couldn't bring herself to admit that the ROP was the primary factor behind our failure in Iraq.

When our leaders start embracing the truth and acting accordingly, perhaps we'll have a chance?

OT

Beagle
Are you still here?
I would like for you to review this article about the friggin teaching of Islam in California?
Is it not over yet?

Oops, it did it again

Bubbaman

O'Reilly had Cundi on tonight

I hope that was a typo...

"militants"
"rebels"
Rebels without a cause (other than the Koran)

Yeah, just pretend it ain't so. RoP, ya know

A challenge that our planet faces today is the global threat of hyperjihadism.

Not terror. That is only the means used to carry out hyperjihadism, a means which is only temporary.

When Iran acquires nukes, our planet will look back longingly at the good old days of terrorist jihad, and face the prospect of nuclear jihad.

Cundi 4 Prez.
Got my vote.

#21 beagle, #18 realwest:

It is curious how the media focuses on the actions of the US military, but gives the terrorists or Islamists or insurgents (or go with the combination plate and choose from column a, b, and c) a pass each time they kill civilians en masse.

That speaks volumes over how the US values life that when some Americans are accused of misconduct, it becomes news - but when the terrorists kill, it's considered nothing new.

Perhaps it is a form of racism - that these terrorists and groups simply are not held to the same standards as the rest of the world (infantalizing them perhaps?) Whatever it is, there is a definite double standard.

I have to believe that the Indian government won't stand for much more of this. I'm guessing that radical islam is not on their list of "favorites".

Alright Kilgore, you and Bubba are not my friends anymore...

#31 lawhawk

A hearty "amen" on that one.

Looking for an affordable vacation? Super low airfares now available to:

*Kashmir
*France
*Racist Mecca
*Londonistan
*Gaza
*Damascus
*Southern Lebanon

Note: female travelers must be dressed in oversized potato sacks.

ibrodsky
and please add Belgium, Holland, Sweden, and Norway to that list.

OT: on the lighter side...
Mahathir: Muslims must build own weapons

Former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad has urged Muslims to build their own weapons, including rockets and fighter jets, instead of relying on Western imports, a news report said Thursday.
...
"Muslims are weak because we have not made the necessary preparation to defend and protect ourselves and the masses," the Star daily quoted him as saying. "We could not do it because we have not mastered the knowledge of science."

Yup. Dummies.

If Al Gore were really concerned about the environment, he would point out that Muslims with incendiary devices are the biggest contributors to global warming.

#25 Bubbaman

...was the primary factor behind our failure in Iraq.

And since when did we fail in Iraq?

What the hell is wrong with you people tonight?

#33 DesertSage

I have a love for Ms. Rice that goes beyond earthly friendships.
:p

OT/
The media are having a field day with the Haditha story, and then there's this next one.

Some of the headlines make it appear as though US military personnel just shoot pregnant women for the fun of it.

What they do not convey is that the shooting was an accident.

The women were being rushed to a hospital (one to give birth) and the dude driving the car didn't notice the signs by the Americans saying, 'this is a check point.'

I suppose the Americans thought maybe the car was filled with suicide bombers or what not.

Pregnant Iraqi Woman Shot Near Security Checkpoint - ABC News

- Seatlle Post Intelligencer

US Troops Kill Pregnant Woman in Iraq

US troops kill pregnant woman in Iraq - Contra Costa Times

#25 bubbaman

O'Reilly had Cundi on tonight - talking about Iraq among other things. She couldn't bring herself to admit that the ROP was the primary factor behind our failure in Iraq.

When our leaders start embracing the truth and acting accordingly, perhaps we'll have a chance?

1. "Cundi" is not a clever play on a name. 2. Overturning a despotic regime and installing democracy among a people who like the idea of democracy and really want to try it after years of respression is not what most people would name as "failure." It's a success.

Another success today - chief head-chopper gets caught in Iraq. How many people - Iraqis - will continue to enjoy their lives now that monster is out of circulation?

It will be another 30 days before the Haditha investigation is complete.

It is possible that the "civilians" were killed by their own and then they blamed it on the US marines?

I wouldn't put this pass the followers of the moon rock god and warlord prophet.

Got yer back, Sage.

#36 St. Pancake

and please add Belgium, Holland, Sweden, and Norway to that list.

Of course, if we count all of the countries conquered by Muslim imperialists plus all the countries that have surrendered to the jihadists, the list would get quite long.

However, we can only offer super low airfares to a subset of terrorist strongholds at any given time. Supply and demand, you know.

Thanks Noam!

ibrodsky
Ah, I beg to differ. Kindly add Malmo to the list, and the others can be negotiated. :)

I will always have Sage's back too.

DesertSage (#39),

And since when did we fail in Iraq?

Don't you read the papers?

We've been failing in Iraq for about three years now.

#31 lawhawk

The real problem, is that the msm really looks at them as "freedom fighters", instead of terrorists.

A few leftist kooks named them "freedom fighters", and the msm joined right in.

Their perception is askew!

#47 St. Pancake

OK, just for you:

Looking for an affordable vacation? Super low airfares now available to:

*Kashmir
*France
*Racist Mecca
*Londonistan
*Gaza
*Damascus
*Southern Lebanon
*Malmo, Sweden ***new service***

Note: female travelers must be dressed in oversized potato sacks.

#31 lawhawk - I believe the Media focuses on alleged wrongdoing on the part of US Military forces for one reason and one reason only: political
capital. Just like that sonofabitch John Murtha, a former marine himself, they can't wait to start braying at an Iraq "My Lai" cause they think it makes Bush look bad. Same with Abu Gharib (sp). Whatever they do, they don't want to wait for a full and fair investigation (which in the Abu Gharib case resulted in some severe and apparently justly deserved punishment for some military personnel) because, gasp, the presumption of innocence which Beagle and I both give to our troops might turn out to be correct. And how do you bash Bush or the US with a fake "My Lai".
The Ancient Media ought to be concerned because we hold our military to higher standards than the Ancient Media holds itself (anyone flush a Koran at Gitmo today?).
I know that if those Marines deliberately murdered true Iraqi innocent civilians, they'll pay a heavy price for it. I also know, from personal experience, that there can be a very fine line between shoot -don't shoot which is awfully hard to see in the heat of battle with IDE's and AK-47's going off all around you and your buddies being shot or killed. But we still hold our military to the highest standards of combat conduct and target acquisition of any nation in the World. Too bad for the Ancient Media and that mofo Murtha.

I hate having any military guys viewing this seeing any dissension on the war.
Wish Mama Winger would come back. We miss you, and we miss hearing about your son.

Ok, I am new here, someone spill and tell me what RoP==?

Also, Terrorism News is flogging Hamas agitprop now, along with the usual anti-american bs and pro chomsky bs. Pertinent part of the article here, don't give this weenie the hits.

It looks like the topelected officials in the Palestinian Hamas party are signaling that they accept Israel's right to exist. Last week the highest-ranking Hamas leader, Prime Minister Ismail Haniya, told Israel's most prestigious newspaper, Ha'aretz: "If Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders, peace will prevail and we will implement a cease-fire [hudna] for many years."

A hudna is more than just a "cease-fire." An erudite article in the Encyclopedia of Islam tells us that "hudna in Islamic law is equivalent to 'international treaty' in modern terminology. Its object is to suspend the legal effects of hostilities and to provide the prerequisite conditions of peace between Muslims and non-Muslims, without the latter's territory becoming part of dar al-Islam.'"

Those last words are the most important. The devout traditionalists of Hamas take Islamic law seriously. They know that the law divides the whole world into two categories: dar al-Islam, the territory ruled by Muslims, and dar al-harb, the rest of the world. For centuries, the land that became Israel was part of dar al-Islam. Only in 1948, when Israel declared its independence, was it claimed by dar al-harb. That's a big part of what galls Muslim traditionalists.

If Hamas is now willing to offer a hudna, it means not merely accepting the existence of Israel (you can't negotiate with a country that doesn't exist), but treating Israel as part of dar al-harb. As the Encyclopedia explains, Muslims don't make a hudna treaty with anyone inside the dar al-Islam. It all goes back to the example set by Mohammed, as recorded in the Quran. He made treaties with Jewish communities who came under Muslim rule. But they are not called hudna. By offering a hudna, Prime Minister Haniyeh is implying that he'll accept the land inside Israel's 1967 borders as gone from Muslim rule for good.

Israel does not demand "diplomatic recognition" from the Palestinians. It demands a public promise that the Palestinians will always accept Israel as a state with a Jewish majority. That is, always was, and always will be the crucial issue for Israel's government and for most Israeli Jews. The hudna offer seems to carry that promise.

#41 gromster

It is a Military Checkpoint.

If anyone doesn't stop, for any reason, they will, and should be shot!

Going out on a limb-but perhaps Bubbaman means that the ROP "insurgents" are contributing toward the appearence of "failure" in Iraq, and that there has been a failure by leaders to identify the jihadi component of these 'militants'.

They are never identified as wild Jihadi murderers-just "insurgents".

America has succeeded in Iraq in an unprecedented manner. Quagmire shmagmire...

#52 St. Pancake
What ever happened to her? Do we know?

Quagmire shmagmire...

Exactly!

#53 Thanos

RoP= Religion of Peace

Take some time and read the LGF dictionary...it's worth it.

56 Killgore Trout
No idea! Wish someone knew. Do you remember if she had a blue nic?

#39 DesertSage 5/31/2006 06:44PM PDT

_{#25 Bubbaman}

_{...was the primary factor behind our failure in Iraq.}

_{And since when did we fail in Iraq?}

_{What the hell is wrong with you people tonight?}

We are losing in Iraq, that's becoming clearer day by day, bombing by bombing. If you are not winning, you are losing. The Muslims have time on their side...Civilization does not have that luxury.

We need to either take the gloves off or just get out and let the Sunni & Shia go at it full-bore. Just declare victory (stop letting liberals define the term- just take it back) and go. Say "have a nice democracy, goodbye, best wishes!"

The war in Iraq and now Afghanistan is not going well no matter how much we might wish so. Three years later, it is grinding the U.S. AS A WHOLE down, men and material and money, and sooner or later voters and/or the Iraqi government (sick joke that it is)are going to demand a withdrawl. Bush handling Islam in his PC "ROP" manner is practically guarantying a democrat victory in '08. Better to leave when you can than when you have to. DECLARE VICTORY AND MOVE ON TO DEAL WITH IRAN, THE REAL THREAT.

BTW, the Marines are innocent of the charges.

#43 pigletU93

Are you suggesting that some of the local Muslims might be [gasp!] lying? Hmmm-yup-it's possible.

#53 Thanos

Welcome-it's "Religion of Peace".

Thanks, I appreciate it, makes sense now.

#53 Thanos
The lingo here takes some getting used to. There's and FAQ (upper left on the page) that helps some...
LGF FAQ

OT

A Shiite dancing at his wedding was dragged off by armed thugs and later found beheaded in a field.

Khudair al-Tamimi, 26, his father, uncle and cousin and a guest were abducted Thursday from the party in Muqdadiya, 50 miles northeast of Baghdad. All five were beheaded, their bodies dumped in farmland just north of the town...

Meanwhile, U.S. troops investigating rumors of an insurgent training camp in Muqdadiya found the bodies of four more beheaded men near an apparent torture chamber.

"A chainsaw and other devices were found," the military said

Without a doubt we will hear about this event again and again, because surely an impartial media will devote its attention to pre-planned beheadings with chainsaws of civilians after being tortured in a torture chamber. /

Take some time and read the LGF dictionary...it's worth it.

Otherwise known as the F*cking Manual.

#42 wanumba 5/31/2006 06:47PM PDT

_{Overturning a despotic regime and installing democracy among a people who like the idea of democracy and really want to try it after years of respression is not what most people would name as "failure."}

Where did that happen? Islam is incompatible with democracy. That's in Jihadi Studies 101.

#59 St. Pancake
I don't think she had a blog or blue nic. the last I saw of here is when her son was home on leave from the sandbox. It was tough for her here, I remember once she posted the names of service men killed that day and noone reponded. She was very upset.
I hope we hear from her again.

55 WriterMom

You don't underatand. When jihadists mass murder their own population, it means they are winning.

/I read that in Der Spiegel

ROP = Religion of Peace = see TheReligionOfPeace.com

Once land is in dar al-Islam it forever remains that way. The proposed treaty if there really is one on the table has an Islamic limit of ten years and can be broken if the Muslims even suspect a violation for which no actual proof is required. Islamic treaties with infidels are only made when Islam is weak and when stremgth returns then the treaty must be immediately broken.

spam spam spam spam (#66),

Where did that happen? Islam is incompatible with democracy.

Yes, Osama said so himself.

That makes about 8 million purple fingered apostates from the last election.

#60, Spam Spam

[Link: noblesseoblige.org...]

#64 Silhouette

The gloves need to come off!

#60 spam spam spam spam

We are losing in Iraq, that's becoming clearer day by day

They got to you also.
Well, it was nice knowing you spam. Are you going to be moving to San Francisco soon?

Killgore
I just wrote her, and enclosed a pic of my tree hugging kitty. I hope I hear back from her.

60 spam

Better to leave when you can than when you have to. DECLARE VICTORY AND MOVE ON TO DEAL WITH IRAN, THE REAL THREAT.

Well, than let's just call it a wash, and move on, eh? Our kids were wounded, maimed and killed over there for nothing, right? Yes, lets call the whole thing off and move on to higher ground.

/sarc

Killgore Trout
Oh, heck. I did not know that. Very kind lady too.

#74 St. Pancake
Good thinking. Let me know what happens.

Will do.

I just do not approve of defeatism. Our military is the greatest in the history of the world. I would like the guys to be able to fight the fight, without being hamstrung by the media and accompanying defeatests.

WORLD ADVENTURE TOURS announces our new program:

"Jihad across the globe"

Travel to exciting destinations. You never know what will happen next. See real live performances of:

*Martyrdom operations
*Farewell parties for collaborators
*Jihad genocide
*Qassam fireworks
*Car swarm treasure hunts
*Wild bird hunting with AK-47s
*Death to the Jews! street festivals
*Kids in Kostumes party

...and much, much more

Note: fees do not include transportation by deluxe donkey. Add $5 if you want to be taken hostage, photographed with Mohammed, and given our special infidel 'shave and haircut' (videotaped so it can be shared with your friends and family).

#60 spam spam spam spam - You simply have to stop listening to the Ancient Media. No, really you do. Moreover, your philosophy that "If you are not winning, you are losing. The Muslims have time on their side...Civilization does not have that luxury.", is quite critically flawed.
First of all Afghanistan is no longer and is not about to become run by the Taliban again. If you read the news carefully you'll see where a "Taliban" leader brags that his 200 troops own such and such a piece of territory (that's largely desolate wildnerness) and then two days later read that in that same area 60 were killed and scores wounded. And btw, what ever happened to that little shit Shiek Omar? And in Iraq, the people of Iraq, with no experience AT ALL in self-goverance, have now voted 3 times, have a duly elected parliment and are frantically trying to put together a new form of government while contemporanelously rebuilding their economy. And, oh yeah, the Iraq insurgency is going so well that they've had to have tons of help from Syrians, Tunisians, Saudis and other "Freedom Fighters" whose main goal seems to be killing Iraqis, not Americans.
Time IS on our side. The one thing that the theocracies, monarchies and dictators in the Muslim middle east fear more than anything else, is a Muslim Democracy that works. The longer it takes them to try to stop it, the weaker they become; the more successful the Iraqi's, in particular, are, the weaker the theocracies, monarchies and dictators become because THEIR muslim population might start to get the idea that democracy and Islam are not necessarily contradictory and are better for the average person in THEIR countries.

#73, 75

Maybe you missed this part of my post #60

"If you are not winning, you are losing. The Muslims have time on their side...Civilization does not have that luxury.

We need to either take the gloves off or just get out and let the Sunni & Shia go at it full-bore."

Why was Sunni vs. Shia a good thing for the west during the Iraq-Iran war, but not now?

Bottom line is: if we do not change our tactics in Iraq and Afghanistan, we will be forced to leave by the democrat president post '08, or by voter sentiment tired of the PC hands-off handling of the war. Maintaining the status-quo is not the way to win.

And as for democracy, look what it wtought in the "Palestinian" territories- Hamasistan.

Democracy is incompatible with Islam- Muslims do not want it, except to install sharia.

Just because I recognize things are not going well (aka not blind) does not mean I'm a liberal- on the contrary.

This is the third major attack on tourists by rebels ...

Rebels ... against the tourists?

realwest
Thank you.

#81 spam spam spam spam "Democracy is incompatible with Islam- Muslims do not want it, except to install sharia."

Turkey.

India (Kashmir) is only afforded only two choices - convert or die and since the invitation to embrace Islam was extended centuries ago. I guess what we are seeing is the continuation of the methodical elimination process as prescribed by Islamic law.

The only way for a non-muslim country to survive is to deport all muslims from their country. There is no other way. The sooner we recognize this fact the better off we'll be.

#80

Are things better now in Iraq than they were a year ago? If things continue as they are now, will things be better a year from now?

How would you define a victory such that the U.S. could leave? When? Remember, we live in a political nation with short-term memory. Voters will force the issue much as they did in Vietnam. But there are plenty of people who, to this day, say we did not lose in Viet Nam.

#84

Turkey- with Mien Kampf on the best seller list. Where the military guaranties the secular government with frequent interventions. Where Kemalism today faces an increasingly Islamic population. How many priests attacked lately? A fine example. NEXT!

#81 spam

Just because I recognize things are not going well (aka not blind) does not mean I'm a liberal- on the contrary.

I don't think anyone is branding you as a liberal, per se. Yet your basic premise is defeatist, if I may borrow the term. If you prove to be prescient, than my country fucked up big time, and many lives were lost for naught. I refuse to accept that notion.

#66 spam et al

Where did that happen? Islam is incompatible with democracy. That's in Jihadi Studies 101

.

Not everyone is a jihadist. It appeals to a certain type - the minority and horrifies the rest - the majority.
We are at war. Misinformation and propaganda is part of it. That all Muslims are potential jihadis is misinformation cast out by the enemy to strike fear and despair into their enemies.

#86 spam spam spam spam - last time I'm gonna try to educate you on this. YES things are better in Iraq now than they were a year ago; infrastructure is being rebuilt; Iraqi security forces are growing both in numbers and proficiency.
I would say we declare victory when we stop the "freedom fighters" from using Syria and Iran as training, recruiting and arming havens and let the Iraqi's deal with each other.
Oh and btw " Voters will force the issue much as they did in Vietnam." Only when cheered on by the likes of you. And we didn't lose in Vietnam, the Ancient Media won. Not after four years and 2600 American lives, but after a total of eleven years and nearly 60,000 lives and 300,000 more casualties.
Stop cheering for the other side.

#84

Turkey isn't a good case study - they have protected their democracy by insisting on being a secular state. The Turkish armed forces are nervous about the growth of political Islam, as I understand it.

#88 Cartman 5/31/2006 07:27PM PDT

Ok, how DO we win in Iraq & Afghanistan?

Why assume leaving the Sunni & Shia to their civil/1200-year old religious war is a defeat?

Why was the Iraq-Iran war good for the west then, but not now?

Don't let the liberals define victory. Liberals excel at changing language to suit their goals. Just say "we won", and go WHILE WE CAN, NOT WHEN WE HAVE TO. Next stop-Iran's nuclear program.

#91 Ben-Ami - Fuck Ben not you too!
"they have protected their democracy by insisting on being a secular state. The Turkish armed forces are nervous about the growth of political Islam, as I understand it."
But the fact is they HAVE protected their democracy. The Turkish Armed Forces may be nervous about the growth of political Islam, hell I'm nervous about the growth of political Islam. But it IS STILL A SECULAR, ISLAMIC DEMOCRACY.

Yes, Turkey is still very much a secular state. Last I heard, most wanted to keep it that way. Do the naysayers have links to stats that most Turks want a jihadist POS govt?

#92 Spam et al

Why was the Iraq-Iran war good for the west then, but not now?

Good for the West? Saddam invaded Iran to grab territory - old fashioned empire-building. It wasn't good for anyone, not the Iraqis not the Iranians. A lot of people died, children were sent into minefields to clear them ... the disregard on both sides for human life was incredible. The only useful things about it was that two evil regimes were locked together for a while, giving the "West" some breathing space before Saddam disengaged his fruitless pursuit to hunt easier prey. Had the Iranian ruling mullahs not been so occupied with simple self-defense they might have been able to embark on their nuclear program sooner than they did.
Good? No.
Useful, perhaps.

#90 realwest

"And we didn't lose in Vietnam"

Are you kidding?

So South Vietnam re-named Saigon to Ho Chi Mihn City?

Three years after we toppled Saddam- when will soldiers be able to leave their fortified bases, go into town for a burger and shake (or a beer, one can dream), date a local girl...when will U.S. business men and women be able to fly into Basra for a meeting?

#92 spam spam spam spam Iran-Iraq was good for the west cause it pitted the Mullahs against Sadaam and occupied them and weakend both of them enormously. And I meant what I said - defeastists like you are the only reason we'll lose. You may not be a lefty liberal, but you sure as hell sound like one.

spam spam spam spam
We abandoned Vietnam!

#81 spam

We need to either take the gloves off

What do you propose?

#98 St. Pancake

Exactly. And that was a mistake. But we had South Vietnam there on our side. In Iraq that is not the case. Theere is sharia law now, put in place in part by the U.S. Big mistake. We will not win unless we defeat Islam and institute via great force, a secular government. I do not see that happening. Do you?

#96 spam spam spam spam You're really becoming a pain in the ass. Stop cherry picking my quotes at least as long as I'm on this thread. I said "And we didn't lose in Vietnam, the Ancient Media won. Not after four years and 2600 American lives, but after a total of eleven years and nearly 60,000 lives and 300,000 more casualties."
Stop cheering for the other side.
And btw, Cambodia and Laos were to the NVA and VietCong what Syria and Iran are to the "freedom fighters". The media took otherwise intelligent people and convinced them we were losing so we left.
The 1968 Tet Offensive, according to no less an authority than Genereal Giap (you should read his memoirs, they are quite instructive) was an absolute, and devasting loss for the communist forces on the battlefield - so much so he offered his resignation to Ho. Then Uncle Walter and the MSM started proclaiming WE lost the Tet offensive and it was katy bar the door, because fucking doomsayers such as yourself bought into the media's bullshit.

spam spam spam spam
The question is, how do you know? The LLL media has its collective head stuffed inside their collective ass.
http://www.geetarz.org/funniez/pics/head-up-ass.jp g

93

No, not me too. I'm not saying that a country that embraces a specifically Muslim identity (like Afghanistan and Iraq) can't also be a democracy,just that Turkey isn't an example of such a country. Turkey is a democracy because it has distanced itself from Islam, while both of the democracies that we are sponsoring in the area have made it the state religion. (I don't have a problem with the Turkish armed forces acting as the guarantors of the country's secular democracy, either).

I don't think the Left understands how hopelessly out of touch they look when they keep bringing up Vietnam.
Everything is Vietnam, everything is coached in terms of Vietnam.
There is a whole generation who don't even know what they are talking about, like "John Kennedy, who? or Marilyn Monroe who?" all the Liberal icons that are so beloved by the media/political Left.
The Left seems so dead - they like death, they wallow in morbid thinking, they are old hags headed for the glue factory and don't know it.
What's going to happen when all the old Lefty geezers retire and expire - look at the ages of the Leftie professors on campuses - fossils!
How long can Robert Byrd hold on? Look at these people! The Republicans have the live bodies, the excitement is there - look at the people they are attracting, successful, dynamic new faces.
Menawhile ... Vietnam Vietnam Vietnam and oh, now for a special on ...Woodstock.
Gack! No one in the upcoming generation thinks rolling around in the mud naked for three days, high as a kite had anything to do with changing the world. Just self-delusional selfish indulgences.
The parallels between the reconstruction of Germany after WWII are far more apt than the old saw of Vietnam.

Damnit, Vietnam is used as a crutch in this war. To hell with the naysayers.
Take this, and shove it up your ass!

Dear Hornets nest critics...

1) No, I'm not a shill for the NYT's

2) I was in full support of the liberation of Iraq

3) We are failing in Iraq and let me articulate why...

After the initial invasion and failure to discover WMD's the American people accepted the premise of deposing Saddam Hussein and the liberation of the Iraqi people as the raison d'etre. At first, we were quite sucessful in removing the regime, rebuilding the infrastructure, and brokering the peace. Despite the casualties (and they were very minimal considering the operation), the American people remained steadfast and in support of continuing efforts.

Over time, we witnessed truly remarkable achievements including the establishment of a governing parliment, re-establishment of the judicial system, and even the successful implementation of a free and fair general election. Abu-Graib, Haditha all but blips in the nation's consciousness (appropriately so) and in spite of the media acrimony, America remained undeterred.

Wackadoos named Cindy and Murtha came and went but they failed to ignite the anti-war sentiments.

Still, something horrific is happening and the American people are getting wise. No, we aren't "war weary" or falling under the spell of the MSM, but the public is beginning to question WHY?

You see, the administration has failed to articulate a clear vision of WHY we are fighting (more on this later). Instead, Americans are seeing the establishment of a new regime, one whose constitution is based on Sharia and where minorities aren't protected. The "New Iraq" is viewed as a cesspool of internecine fighting by crazies who neither respect the rule of law nor abide by any measure of civilization. People are asking, are our sons and daughters fighting and dying for this?

Americans are realizing that these people don't share our values or our way of life and aren't therefore worth saving. Think I'm half-cocked? Start talking to people - not the tin-foiled hat variety, but the people who originally supported the war. They'll tell ya.

Getting back to the administration's failure - its not about troop strength, IED's, lack of armor, etc. - historically we've suffered worse military blunders. In fact, it is from studying some of the successes of the past that we can more clearly assess the errors of the present.

How were we so successful at de-Nazifying Europe and de-Imperializing Japan? Remember the horrific atrocities that these people were carrying out? Comparatively, the "insurgents" are pussies. Think about it - the Nazis and Japs were seriously brainwashed.

Aha! That's it - not only did we kick the axis' as-es - but we demanded wholesale changes in their societies. We controlled their educational systems - eliminating the Nazi and Spirit Warrior ideologies - reformed their judicial codes, and created just societies. It is no simple coincidence that Japan and Germany later became two of the most industrious and prosperous countries in the world.

So, what have we done in Iraq? Allowed the brainwashing to continue and have permitted Sharia to rule the day. Herein lies our greatest failure. While we demonstrated our ability to bomb and destroy, we weren't willing to eliminate the greatest threat of all - the ideology. That's why we lost in Vietnam and that's why we are losing in Iraq.

Spam

You make some valid points, but your outlook seems quite jaded and bleak. I know nothing about you, but I certainly hope you have not served in our military, much less combat. I have not myself, but I'm thinking I wouldn't want you havin' my back in a foxhole, if it came down to that. My Pop told me about guys in combat that bitched and moaned about the futility of war. That was WWII. Thank God that attitude didn't prevail.

realwest

Spam is just a defeatist, he probably hasn't seen anything through in his entire life.

Let him and the rest of the leftists cry and whine that we can't win, it's a quagmire...blah, blah, blah.

The Commander in Chief knows that the public and the MSM are all against him. He also knows that he will see this thing through, that he will not cut and run even though the pressure to do so is enormous. I applaud him for sticking to his convictions, even in the face of spinless politicians that don't have the intestinal fortitude to finish what they started! History will record this conflict as brutal, bloody and hard fought. A war of attrition...the kind that can only be won by outlasting the opponent. But make no mistake, victory is assured! (This whole paragraph was about Abraham Lincoln.)

Now, about Bush...he will stay until we win also!

1/31/68 - Tet Offensive - Confucian - lunar new year - cease-fire
a. 80,000 guerillas attacked 100+ cities, 34 provincial centers, 64 district towns
b. US troops were fighting for control of the cities
c. Hue captured by VC and freed after one month - "We had to destroy the city to save it."
d. shock of US embassy being captured - held only for a few hours
e. American civilians and military came under NLF/VC attacks.
f. TV showed it all - created a credibility gap
1. no censorship for the 1st time
2. Execution of VC suspect by Saigon police chief
3. we had been told that there was light at the end of the tunnel
4. if this was so how could Tet occur
5. Walter Cronkite and Eric Severeid openly questioned the war - TV
6. Dean Rusk - Sec. of State - "WWII would not have been supported"

spam spam spam spam says:

Three years after we toppled Saddam- when will soldiers be able to leave their fortified bases, go into town for a burger and shake (or a beer, one can dream), date a local girl...when will U.S. business men and women be able to fly into Basra for a meeting?

Well I won't refute all those point for point, but just: Can we say moving the goal posts?

#106 bubbaman

That's why we lost in Vietnam and that's why we are losing in Iraq.

Fine. Wander on over to your local V.A. hospital and tell them that.

US Journalist are considered a cause of Vietnam mire.
a. ignored victories and periods of calm as boring
b. press was also ignorant of culture and army
c. Vietnam today credits the US press with their victory
d. military had never told the press the whole story before why expect them to now?

St Pancake,

Long time, no speak. I'm glad his tie is still hangin out. It can be used to pull his head out.

Too bad the same doesn't apply to the MSM.

How hot is TEXAS? PA has been over 90 and humid the last 3 days.

Widow'smight
We had some decent rain today. Broke the heat for a bit. I actually have a window open now.

How are you?

My last take on Tet
g. Tet actually the largest US military victory of the war
1. Lasted till April
2. 3,895 US killed - 5,000 allies
3. 14,300 civilians
4. 58,000 NV and VC
5. After Tet most of the fighting had to be done by North Vietnam
6. Today most of South Vietnam is run by northerners not VC because we killed most of them
7. Westmoreland - Tet was the turning pt. - could have been victory instead defeat
8. War protest went crazy
5. Johnson vowed not to be "the first American president to lose a war."
US kept talking about hope - created a credibility gap

#106 Bubbaman - The problem with democracy is that the majority of people don't always vote the way you want them too. Iraq has never known anything but Sharia law and inter- tribal warfare. They need a chance. They can adopt Islam but insist on a secular form of government - indeed they have. Women NOW can vote. Women NOW can get an education.
You can't take 1200 + years of history and change it in 4 goddamn years. They need a chance to grow and learn and ultimately be brought around to that point of view. It's in the US best interest to have a secure, secularist Islamic state in the Middle East for others to look at and go "oh, geez we could live better as free people". Look what happened in the "Cold War" - The Eastern bloc nations kept looking at the raving successes the Western European Nations were becoming and got fed up with the Soviet Empire. That took 50 goddamn years. Was it worth it? You tell me.

We won the day we crossed the border. If you want to define winning as making Iraq look like a modern liberal western democracy, go ahead and troll away.

Regardless of how we exit, a madman thug is no longer in power & the Iraqis get to struggle with the powerful dilemma that all democracies face: People get the government they deserve. I call it a win.

Even if things go to hell in a handbasket there, it will keep the tribes in such an uproar & so pre-occupied fighting for power that we aren't going to have to worry for awhile.

realwest
Hell yes! The American predilection for wanting quick actions is one thing which is seen as one of our greatest faults.

Can the naysayers list how many of the provinces are secure? Can you cit that?

#106 Bubbaman

You the bubba! Thank you for articulating it so well, I agree.

#118 ST. Pancake

Hell yes! The American predilection for wanting quick actions is one thing which is seen as one of our greatest faults.

It's the media's predilection for wanting quick actions which is one of their greatest faults. Most Americans are quite aware that -- gasp -- wars take time.

#111 Cartman

I have and continue to do so. Some of my information has been gathered from serious dialogue with vets. On an individual basis they generally believe in the mission and want nothing more than to return to their units. Occasionally, you'll run into the occasional bitter naysayer and understandably so.

I am deeply indebted to each and every serviceman and servicewoman defending the freedoms we enjoy. Their sacrifices can never be repaid.

Still, you haven't refuted a single idea I put forth.

wanumba
You think so? Several of out LLL's have spasms when things do not go their way, like right now!
Patience is a virtue in war.

#107 Cartman 5/31/2006 08:01PM PDT

_{"I certainly hope you have not served in our military..."}

I was in the U.S. Navy.

And I would have even covered your back if need be.

And I'm just being realistic about what we face in the war against Islam. I'm not anti-war at all. War has solved all sorts of problems. Don't try to pigeonhole me.

So what DO YOU suggest we do to WIN in Iraq before Hillary & the dems takes the helm?

#123 St. Pancake

Groovy, you know?

wanumba
Right on!
Solid, dude!

I want to conclude with this personal sentiment. If some of you wish to dis' this effort (in Iraq and Afghanistan) as a failure, that is certainly your prerogative. I will guarantee you this - if you choose to abandon hope for a positive outcome, just pack it up and call it another day in the land of the not-so-free. Like it or not, losing this fight is not an option.

Has it ever occured to anyone that attacks on busses are a Saudi plot to get us to stop using public transportation, and drive our own cars, thus using more oil?

/Art Bell mode off

There were some other reasons for failure in Vietnam. We left Vietnam in 1972, just as it was when the U.S. entered in 1953 (Dien Bien Phu). At first we were trying to bail out the French, as usual. But most people say the early 1960's was our early involvement.

The primary reason for failure was having no strategy to actually win the war for the entirety of the conflict. Fighting an endless counter-insurgency battle is not a strategy. There is no home field advantage in war. Taking the fight to the North entailed risks political leaders were not willing to take. Bummer about the 58,000+ killed who were taking all the risks for nothing.

Secondly, the South Vietnamese government wasn't very popular with Buddhists, the dominant religion.

Third, the U.S. was viewed as a replacement of the colonial French. It was an incorrect perception on the whole, but accepted by most Vietnamese. Given our assistance to the French colonial power, I probably would have thought the same thing if I was a rice farmer.

Fourth, pretending Cambodia and Laos were neutral, uninvolved nations. The bombing of both nations was extensive. Troops did serve in both nations. But having to keep it on the QT wasn't a good way to run a war.

Finally, McNamara was using bombing as a means of communication. Instead of persisting until he broke the North, he backed down just as Rolling Thunder, and all attacks against the North, were becoming successful. By 1968, Hanoi was one of the most heavily-defended targets in world history. In other words, the rules of engagement were made for political reasons instead of trying to win the war.

That's where I start and end the list, a lack of political will to win the war from the earliest stages to the withdrawal of American ground troops.

Hey Bubba and Spam, please answer me one question:

If democracy isn't taking a foothold in Iraq, if Sharia is ruling the day as you say, then why are the insurgents fighting so hard to stop the new Iraqi government from forming? You would think that they would just sit back and wait until the government was formed and the Americans left, then they would just run it the way you say that it's becoming anyhow...a sectarian Sharia government.
But they're fighting like crazy to stop it from happening! Tell me why!

#123 St. Pancake - Huh - I just went over to the eleventymillionth Al-Rueters bunghead thread to thank you for coming back over here and to say good night! And you're still here!
Give it up for tonight, really, some people just won't get it cause they truly wish we'd just get the fuck out of Iraq and to hell with the Iraqi's.
Just as we did get the hell out of Vietnam and said to hell with the South Vietnamese.
I hope you have a goodnight and I hope I'll see ya tomorrow.

#124 spam

Don't try to pigeonhole me.

I didn't mean to, and thank you for your service to our country. Please accept my humble gratitude. We agree to disagree. Please read my prior posts. I have no concrete answer for a solution. Far be it for me to propose one. I simply pray for the best for my country, and those who are fighting this very moment for its survival.

realwest
I agree. If you really want to get me started on Nam, we will be here for days.

Time to start a ... commune ... sort of mid-70s thing ...

Oh! A true story. A couple months ago, a bunch of high school kids from all across the country gets together for a Leadership workshop. They are broken up into several groups and given a war game to manage.
Kid walks out of one group, flees to the other group, throws down his cap and says, "There is NO WAY I am going to be party to selling out Taiwan!"

Made us all warm and fuzzy to discover that the rising generation was getting a few things right despite the LLL media/education propaganda they been subjected to.

we weren't willing to eliminate the greatest threat of all - the ideology. That's why we lost in Vietnam

Bullshit. And with that I'm off to bed.

#117 Tell it, Thanos! Exactly.

"We won the day we crossed the border. If you want to define winning as making Iraq look like a modern liberal western democracy, go ahead and troll away.

Regardless of how we exit, a madman thug is no longer in power & the Iraqis get to struggle with the powerful dilemma that all democracies face: People get the government they deserve. I call it a win.

Even if things go to hell in a handbasket there, it will keep the tribes in such an uproar & so pre-occupied fighting for power that we aren't going to have to worry for awhile."

Bravo.

P.S. (!) Beagle - you overlooked two important points: one, the South Vietnamese government was corrupt as hell throughout the war and was viewed that way by the majority of the South Vietnamese and second, after we pulled our combat troops out,
with Nixon promising to continue aid and war materials support for the South Vietnamese who initially did hold their own, the US Congress, bowing to pressure from the defeatists here, CUT OFF ALL FUNDING to the South so it lacked the military wherewithal to withstand the final North Vietnamese push.
Now goodnight - and this time I mean it! LOL!

#129 Beagle

That's where I start and end the list, a lack of political will to win the war from the earliest stages to the withdrawal of American ground troops.

And thus, history is destined to repeat itself.

# 106 Bubbaman,

That's why we lost in Vietnam and that's why we are losing in Iraq.

Please don't use Vietnam vs. Iraq in that context. In Vietnam, our enemies were being supported/supplied by the Soviet Union and China, and we were fighting an evil idea named communism. Our Soldiers thoroughly kicked the Viet Cong's collective a**es in almost every engagement. The Democratic Politicians lost that war by listening to the Moonbats and refusing to supply the South Vietnam military forces with the equipment they needed. You never heard the Left protest the Commies involvement though.

You mention Germany and Japan after WWII. The country of Germany was run by fanaticals, but the population was not much different in their beliefs than other Western European or even Americans were. The Japanese were mostly the fanatic types. Which Group of people are you glad to have on your side now?

Have Patience Bubbaman. Did you know it took 5 years to kick the British out of our new founded country? It took over 6 years to square Germany and Japan away, with many instances of unrest and sabatoge (that's sa-ba-too-gee to 3 stooges fans). We are not dealing with "Makeover" shows on TV here. We are fighting an evil called ISLAM.

I won't measure Success only in terms of a functioning Western democracy. It has been 5 years since ISLAM has struck at the US, or since they have had successful strikes at US interests other than IRAQ. In a fight, it's hard to punch when your opponent has you backed into a corner. We have established bases in the most important part of the world for our country. Notice how the Iranians are backing off their crazy demands and realize they are surrounded. The UN and Euroweenies were thoroughly embarassed by the Iranians, while we sit back and wait. Israel has been hammering the Paleos without the constant sympathy.

The forces of evil in Iraq have been confined to doing what punks and thugs could do in ANY other Muslim country. All the while, we are showing those reasonable Muslims that we won't bail on them, and establishing relationships and intelligence with them we never had.

All this is being done while the MSM and "Piece" movement whines and seethes.

Waiting for the unrest in Iran to start to build...

Haditha probe finds false reports
Inquiry also expected to call for changes in how U.S. troops are trained

The U.S. military investigation of how Marine commanders handled the reporting of events last November in the Iraqi town of Haditha, where troops allegedly killed 24 Iraqi civilians, will conclude that some officers gave false information to their superiors, who then failed to adequately scrutinize reports that should have caught their attention, an Army official said yesterday.

Even before the final report is delivered, Army Gen. George W. Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, is expected to order today that all U.S. and allied troops in Iraq undergo new "core values" training in how to operate professionally and humanely. Not only will leaders discuss how to treat civilians under the rules of engagement, but small units also will be ordered to go through training scenarios to gauge their understanding of those rules. "It's going to include everyone in the coalition," the official said.

I wonder if we have money in the budget to give every soldier their very own koran! Anyone want to start a koran drive?

Anyone?

All I wanted was an answer from spam as to why the insurgents are fighting so hard to keep a democracy (which spam doesn't think is a real democracy) from forming.

Sorry spam, I don't have time to wait around for your answer.

DesertSage
There will not be an answer, I assure you.

St Pancake,

Send the rain this a-way. My lawn is usually very lush (not the drunk kind) at this time of year, but is having "Eva Braun out". I will finish all my planting tomorrow (which is a feat), then time to work on the Vehicles.

The bride and kids are great.

Is school almost over for the summer?

#138 Cartman

And thus, history is destined to repeat itself.

Maybe. Naming "terrorism" as an enemy was a huge blunder, compounded every time someone says it again.

I usually see shades of grey, but war is binary. Either stay out completely, or go to win as quickly as possible. Simply throwing men and machines into the grinder and hoping for the best may work, but it's no way to ensure victory.

In the case of Iraq, not confronting the nations which border Iraq from the beginning has allowed the insurgency to grow, mutate, and stay strong. Syrains, Saudis, Iranians, Jordanians, and miscellaneous jihadis from all over the ummah keep pouring in.

On the other hand, "flypaper" might be the best way to deal with the global jihad until people begin to grasp what we're really fighting.

#142 St. Pancake

You mean the question was too logical?

#138 Cartman

And thus, history is destined to repeat itself

.

Not necessarily. There is a general awareness that Vietnam was lost thru manipulation, media complicity - people are more wary of being fooled AND want victory.
Furthermore, our soldiers are very tech-savvy - they are getting out news and information in a way that wasn't possible in the 1960s and 1970s. They come back and see what the media is up to. The military has learned a lot of lessons from Vietnam, unlike the press which is trying to recreate their "heyday." Our soldiers are problem-solvers, with a lot of grass-roots experience now in setting up political institutions. What happens when we get back wave after wave of politically-savvy media-competent soldiers who place a lot of value on democracy? Lots of new politicians ... and not signed up as Democrats.

Widow'smight
It is out already. Praise be!

Sage, yes, it was too logical. Logic throws people for a loop.

Widow'smight
So glad to hear. Am delighted about shcool being out. As can be seen, my hours have reversed. :0

PIMF
school. My typing is really hitting the skids, lol.

spam spam spam spam (#124),

So what DO YOU suggest we do to WIN in Iraq before Hillary & the dems takes the helm?

Damn, we not only have lost in Iraq, we've already lost the 2008 election. Things are looking worse and worse.

150 Geepers
According to him, everything has gone to hell already.

I wouldn't give Hillary the Democratic nomination for the 2008 election as things stand now. The Dems have noticed her solid negatives never drop below 40%. Gore might be making a run as we type.

#141 DesertSage 5/31/2006 08:40PM PDT

"All I wanted was an answer from spam as to why the insurgents are fighting so hard to keep a democracy (which spam doesn't think is a real democracy) from forming."

Answer: Because they take the Qur'an literally- They are True Muslims.

#146 wanumba

There is a general awareness that Vietnam was lost thru manipulation, media complicity

There is? Please enlighten me as to how that aspect of this conflict is any different.

Shrillary? Never!
Gore is increasingly seen as a raving loon, don't you think?

#142 St. Pancake 5/31/2006 08:43PM PDT

"DesertSage
There will not be an answer, I assure you."

Wrong you are. See above.

So, again, all muslims are this way? Ok... great response.

Heh. You all having fun with the LLL racist?

Notice how it hates muslims? POS.

#144 Beagle

Maybe. Naming "terrorism" as an enemy was a huge blunder, compounded every time someone says it again.

Well, than what else should it have been named? A sow's ear? Sheesh.

St Pancake,

I'm usually in bed myself at this time, but am working the Iraq Quagmire I mean Graveyard shift. Fortunately, I'm at home.

Every once in a while, I can go peek on the Bride, kids and my Dog to see how they're doing. They might even get a little kiss from the Old Man (except the dog).

On Memorial Day evening, I was going back and forth between the History Channel's George Washington special and a program about men who served on Iwo Jima, and their trip back their with their families. I started to think how many people on this site get all caught up in worrying about Iraq, Iran and Islam. It seems they forget to enjoy and appreciate the differences and benefits our country has over the 3 I's.

That's why I enjoy folks such as yourself. You can hate evil, yet enjoy life. If we stop enjoying our lives, evil starts to win!

#159 Cartman

Well, than what else should it have been named? A sow's ear? Sheesh.

Islamic imperialism
Global jihad
Caliphascism

To name three. Anything but waging war against a means of warfare instead of the actual enemy.

#155 St. P

Gore is increasingly seen as a raving loon, don't you think?

The MSM is writing hageographies of the guy. He's getting an image makeover on a daily basis.

He's completely wrong on global warming, but that's a very popular position with the moonbats. They're going to do in global capitalism with Islam, PC, moral eqivalence, and global warming.

I miss the Cold War. I'll honest Communists over the frazzled moonbats we have now.

#116 Realwest

I don't want to take any of your quotes out of context but would like to address some of your assertions. In terms of the issues of Democracy, it cannot exist in the absence of the rule of law. One of the apriori assumptions is that the rule of law is just. We can argue the nuances over Constitutional law in the U.S., however one of the brilliances of the FF was their ability to create a self-righting mechanism - to provide a means for redress.

The last time I checked, the U.S. Constitution begins this way, "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity..."

In contrast, the Iraqi constitution reads, "In the name of Allah..."

When the Constitution was ratified in 1787 it didn't contain the Bill of Rights because many saw including these freedoms as being unnecessary. Still, the debate continued and 4 short years later, the BOR went into effect. According to the First Ammendment, " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The second article of the Iraqi Constitution states, "...Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a fundamental source of legislation:

...No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established."

This isn't about "adopt(ing) Islam" as part of a Democracy - these issues are mutually exclusive.

So, please don't lecture me on the merits of Democracy. But let's move on...

You chose to focus on the value of women voting. A noble choice as it took American women 133 years before they gained that privilege. Still is there any comparison how women are treated in the respective societies? So, is voting that important compared to the freedom to marry/divorce, equal protection, freedom from honor killings, beatings, etc.? It seems that they are going about things all bass ackwards?

With respect to historical imperatives, let's look at Iraq's modern history - put aside the fact that the levant was the source of Western thought. For the better part of a century, Iraq was not a religious theocracy. After Iraq became a LON Mandate in the 1920's it was placed under British rule. They set up the political and constitutional framework. Without going into all of the details - though I urge you to study Iraq's history - the Brits failed. Still, the Iraqis had plenty of opportunities to set up a country based on the imperative of individual rights.

I would strongly disagree with the assertion that it is in our interest to have a "secularist Islamist state" in the M.E. to serve as a role model. Besides, we already have one - Turkey - and I haven't seen all of the other nations clamoring to become like Turkey. Besides, Turkey ain't such a great role model.

Your analogy to the "Cold War" was an interesting one, though arguably falacious. The Soviet Bloc failed because it was an unsustainable model, not because Eastern States envied our successes. Fortunately, we were able to stave off any significant military actions long enough for the respective economic models to prove themselves.

Unfortunately, I don't think that we have a similar luxury with Islame. Our clash of ideologies between Capitalism and Communism, were held in check by MAD. The assumptions were that the commies valued their lives just as much as we did. Apparently, this was true, otherwise we wouldn't be here today.

In contrast, the [bigoted word]s don't share this view. The SOB's would rather die for their moon g-d than live. MAD won't work with the [bigoted word]s and the comparison between the Cold War and the War on Terror is patently false.

Keep trying.

Are we really arguing over nomenclature?

The Second World War didn't exactly name the enemy either did it?

162 Beagle
It is terrible that we miss the Cold War, damnit. I know what you mean though. On second thought, it was more clear cut than this multicultural jihadism we are currently confronted with.

DesertSage asked why are the insurgents fighting so hard?

Oy, let's tackle this one...

Why are the Paleonazis fighting so hard?

Why are the [bigoted word]s in Sudan killing each other?

Why are [bigoted word]s killing people 'round the world?

It's the F-ing ideology!

Besides, the "insurgents" are backed by Iran, Syria, and Al-Qaeda.

So, now I've answered your question.

Why don't you refute the cogent arguments I've advanced rather than arguing how many years it takes, or focusing on the "we're losing" quote?

Better yet, why not tackle the reasons the Israelis are losing? Afterall, they've won the military battles, captured territory, and have military supremacy, yet they're losing.

I've got to get some sleep - have to be on the top of my game tomorrow. I'll check back for some intelligent replies in the a.m.

Goodnight all.

Why are Muslims killing people 'round the world?

Why aren't they killing them here in the States?

One last comment before I go, this evening...

I'm reading many folks who are guilty of the same failings as the Prez; projection of Western ideals and values onto those who do not subscribe to them.

While I appreciate that at some level all men and women yearn to be free (sorry W) the perceptions of freedom for samesaid individuals may differ dramatically from those you hold dear.

We throw around the rubric of "freedom" and "Democracy" quite liberally without considering its true meaning.

How many of you have lived in countries other than the U.S. where "Democracy" is practiced? Ever live under European law? It sucks. Is it any wonder that Europeons are such woosies?

And consider this - the Europeons are closest in values to our own and yet are miles away in terms of the Democratic experience.

Projection of our values onto those who don't share a similar vision is a dangerous thing.

Bubbaman
I have. I lived in Europe and Africa.

http://lebop.blogspot.com/
Interesting persepctive from a Lebanese.

169 Bubbaman

Projection of our values onto those who don't share a similar vision is a dangerous thing.

Agreed. However - there's always hope for the next generation in this day and age of easy and unstoppable communication. So transform the entire society, no. But plant seeds to bear fruit in 20 years? Maybe.

Sarah D.

Surely, you jest. I expect more from you:

John Muhammed, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, Amer El-Maati, Aafia Siddiqui, Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, Abderraouf Jdey, and Adnan Gulshair El Shukrijumah, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, Jose Padilla, Mukhtar Al-Bakri, Sahim Alwan, Faysal Galab, Shafal Mosed, Yaseinn Taher, Yahya Goba, the Portland six (or seven) - I'm getting tired of typing.

and this is just scratching the surface. There are dozens who have been arrested and more who will be. There isn't a day that goes by that our law enforcement agencies aren't chasing leads on domestic terrorists. Should I go on?

With that attitude, then we should all tell the Iranian students to go to hell?
But they are muslims?
Sheesh!

Bubbaman (#163),

In contrast, the Iraqi constitution reads, "In the name of Allah..."

The second article of the Iraqi Constitution states, "...:

...No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established."

Ya left out some stuff:

Full Text of the Iraqi Constitution

Article 1:

The Republic of Iraq is a single, independent federal state with full sovereignty. Its system of government is republican, representative Parliamentary and democratic.

Article 2:

B. No law that contradicts the principles of democracy may be established.

C. No law that contradicts the rights and basic freedoms stipulated in this constitution may be established.

Article 13:

First: This constitution is the sublime and supreme law in Iraq and shall be binding in all parts of Iraq without exception.

Second: No law shall be enacted that contradicts this constitution. Any text in any regional constitutions or any other legal text that contradicts it is deemed void.

Article 14:

Iraqis are equal before the law without discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, origin, color, religion, creed, belief or opinion, or economic and social status.

The continuing violence in Iraq seems to be combinations of:
1) Revenge cycles
2) Tribal turf wars
3) Islamists psociopaths
4) Political militias
5) Kidnap ransom/extortion rings(apparently lucrative thanks to German and Italian ransom payments)
6) Iranian and Syrian (and Saudi?) kettle stirring

Some are newly arrived troublemakers, some were already there. Previously Saddam would have had some on his payroll, and brutally tortured some others to death as a lesson to the rest. I believe some districts remain violent because the justice that must be meted out would not be palatable to our TV cameras. For example elements of the Interior Ministry have their own agenda and need to be purged.

Frankly nearly all of the region has never been civilized according to Western standards or capable of democratic self-rule. As far as Iraq goes I think we have to get out as soon as their government is strong enough to stand on its legs and kill the vermin in its house - but not sooner. At best it will be like Turkey, at worst like Palestine, and most likely will end up like Pakistan. The key is probably to kill every AQ/wahhabi Islamist possible, and root out the foreign elements, then perhaps Iraqi tribal affiliations will succeed in holding a Sunni/Shiite/Kurd federal system together.

Bubbaman (#166),

DesertSage asked why are the insurgents fighting so hard?

Oy, let's tackle this one...

Why are the Paleonazis fighting so hard?

Why are the Muslims in Sudan killing each other?

Why are Muslims killing people 'round the world?

It's the F-ing ideology!

Besides, the "insurgents" are backed by Iran, Syria, and Al-Qaeda.

So, now I've answered your question.

Well that was particularly shallow.

#166 Bubbaman

Why are the Paleonazis fighting so hard?

Why are the Muslims in Sudan killing each other?

Why are Muslims killing people 'round the world?

It's the F-ing ideology!

Besides, the "insurgents" are backed by Iran, Syria, and Al-Qaeda.

All you did was answer my question with four more questions and a statement. So let's concentrate on the statement: Besides, the "insurgents" are backed by Iran, Syria, and Al-Qaeda.

Why aren't these "insurgents" fighting in Iran or Syria the way they are doing in Iraq? Could it be that Iran and Syria are not democracy's? They don't need to fight in those countries, they already own them. Iraq is different. Iraq has a chance of breaking out of the stranglehold of totalitarianism that strangles Iran and Syria. That's why they're fighting so hard!
Iraq has a chance, and you defeatists want to take it away from them. It's as plain as day, you said it yourself...Muslims do as Muslims do, and they do dictatorship very well. That's what the insurgents want, another Muslim dictatorship in Iraq and they're gonna fight like crazy to get it, even though the Iraqi people voted for democracy.

People like you want to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. You could give a shit less what is best for Iraq. You could give a shit less what's best for the United States. Do you really think that leaving Iraq right now is best for either country? Do you have any sense of vision what so ever? Do you really think that the world would be a better place if Al Qaeda took over Iraq? It would be a disaster for the Middle East and for the world.

Cut and run because we've had some setbacks? We've had some problems with Abu Grhiab and maybe Haditha, and the war has been brutal and bloody. But are we beaten? HELL NO! We've had several thousand troops killed and I feel for every one of them, I was a Marine myself. But is their moral low? HELL NO!

The only moral that is low is with defeatists like you that can't stomach the fact that bad things happen in war. Our brave, proud Soldiers and Marines can't understand your attitude, and I don't blame them, because I don't either!

They're [bigoted word] gangsters with a gangster religion who are terrorized by cartoons and ostensibly fear humiliation above death. But when we give them cartoons and humiliation the liberals in our society jump to the [bigoted word]s aid.

Waiting for the crap to hit the fan with this latest horrific example of humiliation.

[Link: silentrunning.tv...]

I'm wondering if the western world's concept of humiliation is the same as our [bigoted word] tormentor's. Maybe we're mistaking humor for humiliation.

Bubbaman,

Geepers beat me to the Iraqi Constitution you cherry picked from. But that Constitution and it's implementation by an elected body is really the great enemy of Radical Islam and it's followers.

If we look at all other Muslim/Arab military and political activity, we see a constant, their lack of conviction in a struggle. Each time they attacked Israel, they cut and run without putting up much of a struggle. On the Philistine issue, they spew all this hatred towards Israel, but they won't really back the Philistines, or take them into their countries. Desert Storm 1 and our most recent invasion proved no different. Notice how other Arab countries stay out of confronting the US, rather they use their Islamic propaganda machines to spew their hatred. They also like to whine to the UN and MSM about this historical mistreatment by Western Powers. Did you ever hear Toby Keith's "The Taliban Song"? The Taliban took their traveling misery show back to Pakistan rather than standing and fighting.

Muslim Countries always seem to cut and run, then hope Public Opinion will work in their favor. Iraq is the exception to the rule here! I believe the Strategic Implications for Radical Islam are enormous if Iraq gets their act together.

1) Geographically, Iraq is about right smack in the middle of the Middle East, bordering on such Democratic Strongholds as Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia. It is also near to Muslim holy sites of Mecca and Medina. The Muslim psyche of having Infidels next door doesn't sit too well with AL's whatever.

2) Oil. Iraq has large oil reserves, and they have lost a major source of money for their anti- (fill in the blank) machine.

3) Politically. A thriving Democracy in Iraq would destroy the Radical recruiting scheme they have going. As long as they can blame unrest on the Infidels, and get non-radical muslims to tolerate them, they have a chance of defeating us.

4) Militarily. Having all the US and Coalition bases in the Middle East is bad for business. US bases protect the Gulf States who do business with Westerners (Infidels) are not seeking to slit their own throats by allowing infidel's throats to be slit. It also allows us to insure the flow of oil which Infidels need. Iran is starting to realize it is surrounded by US forces, and threatening us ain't such a good idea.

The Islamomaniacs know this battle is it for them, therefore, they won't run and hide like they usually do. If Iraq goes non-terrorist, it won't be long until one of it's neighbors do the same thing.

Gory, gory hallelujah,
Gory, gory hallelujah,
Gory, gory hallelujah,
Islam is marching on!

Obviously Kashmir needs to stop importing oil from Saudi Arabia, and go to 'alternative' fuels. That would surely end this terrorism problem.

#181 azul93gt

Nice to be brought back to the original theme of the thread.

India is on the front line of the terror war and has been for a long time.

For all the whining about losing strategies, the Bush administration acknowledges this reality and is pursuing a historic strategic alliance with India. Reeks of foresight. Democrats appear to not support this initiative. The media is AWOL or hostile on these critical negotiations. Indians are noticing that Bush is offering a full partnership, not a sop. They are taking note of which party is for it and which is against it.

#174 Geepers,

It's not what I left out, but what the Iraqis put into their "constitution". It is a hate document and you know it. Why are you trying to placate the situation? Since you are so enamored by this POS, could you please tell me what protections are afforded to Joos?

#177 DesertSage,
My rhetorical questions were answers albeit coarsely composed. In terms of the lack of "insurgents" in Syria and Iran, I think you are gravely mistaken. If Muslim fundamentalists tried anything in Syria, they'd be summarily executed. Think not? Ask the people who used to inhabit Hama, Syria - oh that's right they opposed the government and were dead.

Why weren't terrorists fighting in secular Iraq while Sadam was chief potentate? 'Cause he was killing everyone by the thousands and the Jihadis hadn't the balls to challenge him.

People like you want to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. You could give a shit less what is best for Iraq. You could give a shit less what's best for the United States. Do you really think that leaving Iraq right now is best for either country? Do you have any sense of vision what so ever? Do you really think that the world would be a better place if Al Qaeda took over Iraq? It would be a disaster for the Middle East and for the world.

People like me? Audacious statement at best. What do you know about people "like me?" You've mischaracterized every single statement I've made and haven't been able to refute any of my assertions. All you can come up with are ad hominem attacks on my character.

I never said that we should "leave Iraq" or allow "Al Qaeda" to take over" and I really resent your attributing your words to me. Parse my text - I've never said such things.

I'm a dyed-in-the-wool patriot who has/would do anything to preserve this country and the freedoms which you enjoy.

In order to defeat the "insurgents" we need to do a couple of things: 1) As I stated earlier, we need to control their judiciary, educational and political systems. 2) We need to kick butt and destroy, yes anhilate the terrorists. That's what I've stated previously and I'm hard pressed to understand how you can misconstrue my statements. We are failing because we are doing neither and cannot win a war of attrition any better than the Israelis.

#179 Widow'smight

"Muslim countries always seem to cut and run" as you stated in the GW and in their conflicts with Israel. Muslims fear a strong hand and conviction. That's why dictators like Sadam could stay in power so long. As soon as they sense any measure of weakness as they have with the concessions made by Israel, they act like hyenas casing a kill.

Bubbaman (#183),

It is a hate document and you know it.

Is this one of those "cogent" arguments you were talking about earlier?

#184 Geepers

Another ad hominem attack - unable to refute anything.

Since you are so in love with the Iraqi constitution, why don't you try to incorporate some of its provisions into our own? I particularly like the prominence of Sharia.

Again, will you please tell me how Joos are regarded under their constitution?

Bubbaman (#185),

You don't know what an ad hominem is do you?

Here, if it good enough for you, I'll just use your technique:

It's not a hate document and you know it.

In the words of one of my favorite Presidents, "There you go again".

You'd make an excellent Dem operative - dodging questions, personal attacks. Pathetic (try looking that one up). It comes from the root Greek pathos.

Geepers,

Since you continue to dodge the question, I'll answer it for you.

In the first draft of the Iraqi constitution, Joos were specifically denied citizenship since they were expelled from the country in the 40's and 50's and under the slated provisions, one could only be considered a citizen (and assume attendant rights)if they had claims after 1963.

In an attempt to cover up this glaring insult the final constitution used a bit of deception to achieve the same goal:

Article 18:

(First: Iraqi nationality is the right of every Iraqi and shall be the basis of his citizenship.)

(Second: An Iraqi is any person born to an Iraqi father or mother. This will regulated by law.)

Third:

A. An Iraqi citizen by birth may not have his nationality withdrawn for any reason. Any person who had his nationality withdrawn shall have the right to reclaim it, and this will be stipulated by law.

B. The Iraqi nationality shall be withdrawn from the naturalized in the cases stipulated by law.

Fourth: An Iraqi may have multiple nationalities. Everyone who assumes a senior, security sovereign position must abandon any other acquired nationality. This will be organized by law.

Fifth: Iraqi citizenship shall not be granted for the purposes of the policy of settling people that cause an imbalance in the population composition of Iraq.

Sixth: A law shall regulate the provisions of nationality. The competent courts shall consider the suits resulting from it.

Since these "laws" aren't delineated and Joos have no rights under the current laws, in effect they continue to enjoy no rights. Thus all property and citizen rights claims are null and void.

Since the parliment has taken office, one of the first courses of action was to uphold the boycott against Israel. Another brilliant move by your beloved constitutionalists.

Now, that I have had the courage to address the issues, why don't you sod off?