Hoo-ah, Mr. President!

BTW... first! *eg*

Again, W challenges the UN:

The peace and security of free nations now rests on three pillars: First, international organizations must be equal to the challenges facing our world, from lifting up failing states to opposing proliferation.

But the L³ and the R³ thinks he's a moron? Not moving fast enough?

reaganite

But the L³

They've got pink tanks. Watch out.

I'm glad he's been able to stay so steadfastly on message.

#3 ralph

They've got pink tanks. Watch out.

Animal house?

The one at the banquet wasn't too shabby either. HM The Queen noticably laughed outloud at one of his jokes.

Video here. Shuffle over to the next page for the Whitehall speech.

Disclaimer:
Yes, okay, I know it's Reuters but very few clips have commentary added and, in fact, you get to see some stuff that's not on the TV because this is the stuff that gets sold to TV.

I approve of his vision, I just wish he would be more explicit in explaining the alternative. Reform is the last change to resolve the conflict between Islam and the west without massive bloodshed. Unless the Islamic world is reformed to the point where it no longer supports terrorism, we cannot coexist with them. They have proven themselves unable to reform. If we cannot reform them, then our only choice is to deter them. Lets face it, they currently are not deterred, and most likely will not be until we are forced to nuke a city (probably in retaliation for nuking one of ours).

Arrests in Turkey

#5 reaganite

Animal house?

Nah more like "Queer eye for the Midland guy"

Our President does not generally speak as well as Churchill did (who does?). I can picture Sir Winston's ghost in the audience nodding, cheering, and feeling a touch of Deja Vu
though.

#7 happycynic
A year ago I was at CENTAF HQ, many here said W would never attack Iraq. Since then many here have claimed that W is on the Saudi payroll. Since then many have screamed bloody murder when he said RoP. Slowly, he keeps changing the message. Always to the side of right.

I know many here are sick of the "never play poker with W" message.

It's the semi-finals, he's still winning.

Or in the words of the Stones:

You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes you might find
You get what you need

Bravo Mr. President !!

Was this speech broadcast?

#5 reaganite

I don't know if you know this already or how I should break it to you, but your buddy VFI os outta here. sniff sniff

#10 bigel
Was that so hard? Being civil and all? When you post that way, I have exactly zero problem with you. And BTW, I agree with you.

OTOH, think about it, he's on a good will tour of Europe. Do we want to piss them off as well as the Islaminazi nations at the same time?

This one was my fav:

"President Wilson had come to Europe with his 14 Points for Peace. Many complimented him on his vision; yet some were dubious. Take, for example, the Prime Minister of France. He complained that God, himself, had only 10 commandments. (Laughter.) Sounds familiar. (Laughter.) "

From the speech:

"My nation welcomes the growing unity of Europe, and the world needs America and the European Union to work in common purpose for the advance of security and justice."

Wrong a thousand times. There's still seems to be a general feeling the European Union is in some way good for America -- easier to deal with and understand than a lot of separate squabbling nations -- and flattering because superficially it appears to be an imitation of the USA. But actually, it's driven by a profound jealousy of America, amounting in France and Germany, at least, to something like hostility

[Link: www.taemag.com...]

"The E.U. would like to expel American power from the European continent and weaken it everywhere else. If British military forces come under a European command, they won't any longer be used to support American operations. In that, and other, senses, the creation of the E.U. is an obstacle to American power. "

NPR had bits from this speech, followed by 3 British commentators giving (supposed) British and European opinion on what the main points were and how they were received.

One snippy guy - probably the one from Al-Guardian - sniffed that all this talk about "bringing democracy to the Middle East" is all well and good, but the Europeans know that Bush must start with the Palestinian-Israeli problem, if he hopes to bring peace to the region. [I.e., it's not about democracy and freedom, it's about those damn stubborn Jews.]

And as for calling for a democratic Palestinian government - he said that's completely backwards - the Europeans and most Brits think it's far more important for the U.S. to pressure Israel into concessions as a starting point for "peace" than to wait until the Palestinians can get themselves a reasonable, trustworthy government. [I.e., never mind all that democracy stuff, what are you going to do about those damn Jews?!]

I got so infuriated, I had to turn the damn radio off.

#13 RiR
I got back into the office and read the only thread I had open, I hit "refresh" and saw Charles' banning. The other people in my office looked at me very strangely when I was giggling!

Great speech, Dubya.

That's my President!

Waiting for the LLL response, which'll once again oversimplify the point of the speech, shove words in his mouth, and make it look like "typical American arrogance." After all, to let him make a speech like this without getting challenged is forbidden.

And, like I've said before, that's one hell of a poker face he's got. Making his opponents think he's stupid while slipping an ace outta his sleeve.

No, he shouldn't have said Israel should nuke the place

Thank you.

I'm sort of disappointed with the passage on Wilson. National self-determination works in Europe and at the time it was applied to Europe alone. And yet the 14 Points are still the foundation of the US foreign policy even when it comes to artificial nations like Pals. I think it's time to become more culturally sensitive...

#18 reaganite

RWC my man. RWC. :-)

Here is how the British public mostly feel about this visit?

BBC Talking Point

Most are very supportive. Expect for few french posters of course.

#22 Right Wing Conspirator
*Hanging head in shame* My apologies sir!

What I want to know is this: how can people hear a speech like this, and still call Dubya a simpleton?

#25 reaganite

Not a problem. Heres PDM's take on todays happenings, just in case you happened to miss it.

Alright all, off to brave rainy day WDC I-95 traffic. Blah !!!

#25 andrew
The "instant gratification" crowd will always bitch.

#26 RWC
Be safe!

#25 andrew

Because it was done by his handlers.

But Bush is stubborn and doesn't listen to anyone.

His handlers tell him not to listen to anyone.

But if he's a moron how would he understand what they mean.

Because it is the neocon-zionist conspiracy using him as a puppet.

Etc...etc...etc...

/DU logic off

#28 reaganite

Thanks. Bold faced too, huh?

Until tonight everyone. Yeeesshh. I should probably crack open a book or something. Eh, words on a screen. Good enough.

"...attacks...on Bali, Jakarta, Casablanca, Bombay, Mombassa, Najaf, Jerusalem, Riyadh, Baghdad, and Istanbul..."

If you will permit me Mr. President, I would like to add Nasiriyah to that list - in honor of the 19 Italians who made the ultimate sacrafice there.

#30   bigel

I've got to agree with you there. Pissing someone off is one of the best ways of finding out what they really think.

One of his best. He is laying out the groundwork for after when he is re-elected for continuation of the Bush Doctrine in other places.

Does anyone here know where I can see a video of the speech on the web?

reaganite #12,

A year ago I was at CENTAF HQ, many here said W would never attack Iraq. Since then many here have claimed that W is on the Saudi payroll. Since then many have screamed bloody murder when he said RoP. Slowly, he keeps changing the message. Always to the side of right.

Yeah, but it's unfair: You have inside information ;).

Incidentally, when/where/for what did VFI get banned?

#30 bigel
Think about what you say. I'm not trying to equate Nazi Germany or WWII Japan to the USA in the least, but what happened when they pissed off the world? Do you honestly think the US on her own can defeat the entire world on her own, with everyone pissed at her?

#31 Right Wing Conspirator

Thanks. Bold faced too, huh?

I had to prove I can read! ;-Þ

#36 reaganite

Do you honestly think the US on her own can defeat the entire world on her own, with everyone pissed at her?

Not without nukes ;-)

let's roll #33

No. But when and if you make up, you might find yourself better friends.

#35 Ariel
The banishment of the Howling Banshee™

#38 andrew

Not without nukes ;-)

That's where the poker game comes in.

Sorry, I'm new here folks. What do LLL and RRR stand for?

Great speech. The tragedy is that he doesn't believe a word of what he himself says.

#42 The_New_Guy
Loony Liberal Left, Rabid Raving Right.

I was wondering when the clowns would show up.

reaganite #40 - Thanks. Oh well, it was kind of fun to argue inane things with her for on rare occasions.

#43 Puss
Are ya clairvoyant then?

#43 Russ

Great speech. The tragedy is that he doesn't believe a word of what he himself says.

So you know him personally? What's he really like?

Too bad this isn't the #1 story. (the speech/visit)

Jacko's imminent arrest is taking most of the coverage now.

Clairvoyance, I hear, is a symptom of alcoholism... I hope he doesn't believe what he says about "Palestine".

Great Speech

BTW, Is it my imagination or has the protest crowds not been what they were promoted to be. I'm not seeing tens of thousands. Has there been any photos showing crowds of more than 500-1000?

A mostly great speech which, combined with his Democracy speech last week, has made transparent US foreign policy in broad and deep terms. I only hope that the feckless US Secretary of State and the rest of the cretins that populate that government agency will not undermine its goals.

And no, bigel, the president didn't just allude to anti-Semitism, he repeatedly referred to it, even calling upon heads of state in Europe and elsewhere to fight it.

What pissed me off was Bush's utterly gutless charge that Israel was "daily" humiliating the Paleo savages, and describing its defensive wall as a hostile measure to peace.

This bullshit about our appearing "neutral" in the Mideast gets us nothing from anyone politically, so why does he keep at it--to satisfy the moonbats at the Stateless Department?

#51 Ms. Andi
Instapundit has some good info on that.

Great speech! Very well recieved over here in Blighty.

(the only bit that was objectionable was the crap someone inserted about "dailly humiliation of the pals" but at least he had the decency to cough when he read it)

Bush is hated by so many because he has chosen the most dangerous and difficult path. He has chosen to be a world LEADER, not merely a worldly politician.

The differences are clear. Bush wants to force changes that are long overdue in another part of the world for the sake and safety of all of us. Yet, in "intellectually elite" circles, there is a stubborn belief that we must respect all other cultures, governments, etc. as "equal" and let them change (or more likely NOT change) on their own. There are also the governments of Europe who, for 200 years, have never wanted to pick up a gun unless scores of the enemy were marching across their border (and by then it was always too late).

Now these same countries refuse to acknowledge the World War that western culture is ALREADY engaged in with Radical Islam, preferring to think of it as something that can be treated like isolated crimes of a few individuals, or worse, something that can be appeased.

Let's not also forget that many of these countries (France in particular) will be Muslim nations in about 50 years. Is it any wonder why they HATE leadership of the active, world-shaping kind?

Anybody have a video copy of the speech they could email me? Or a link to it (the video) at some place other than CSPAN? For some reason it won't open from CSPAN's server. Thanks.

Great speeches, I love a guy that mixes humor with heavy subjects.

Today is the anniversery of another great speech, when the US was in trying times, not even knowing if it would survive:

GB address

OT

check out this lad's expression, hate, fear,...drugs?!

Bad Drugs at London

For a less enthusiastic interpretation of the Bush speech, see:

IsraPundit

A great speech. Bush and Blair are probably the only democratic leaders today that are up to the challenge of Islamism.

[Link: www.faithfreedom.org...] A global movement of ex-muslims.

I've been flipping through the AP slideshow of pictures of the protests, and I can't find a single picture that seems to have more than 200 people in it.

Where's the 100,000 we were promised?

Oh yeah, and many that DID show up were of the Finsbury Park variety, if you know what I mean.

#43 Russ

The tragedy is that he doesn't believe a word of what he himself says.

I certainly hope so. Here are the parts I hope Dubya doesn't truly believe..

The democratic progress we've seen in the Middle East was not imposed from abroad, and neither will the greater progress we hope to see.

It is not realism to suppose that one-fifth of humanity is unsuited to liberty; it is pessimism and condescension, and we should have none of it.

Yet democracy will succeed in Iraq

Achieving peace in the Holy Land is not just a matter of the shape of a border. As we work on the details of peace, we must look to the heart of the matter, which is the need for a viable Palestinian democracy.

The long-suffering Palestinian people deserve better.

Israel should... end the daily humiliation of the Palestinian people, and not prejudice final negotiations with the placements of walls and fences.

Good speech overall. Although Dubya is not above throwing a few bones to the Israel-bashers.

Reaganite #40

Veritable f**king Idiot banned?

That's not fair! At least you have ME to get pissed at. What LGFer can I get pissed off at now?

Tough talk from the President. Too bad its just that -- TALK.

Pres. Bush does a great job of hiring speech writers who can plagiarize the Founding Fathers and others with moral stature. The Pres. can read the speeches, but his policy is the opposite.

The Bush policy -- the ACTUAL policy, not the stated policy -- is one of inaction, delay, and appeasement.

President Clinton may have received oral sex from a bimbo, but it was President Bush who was on his knees performing on murderers and tyrants, asking the UN for approval. And the conservatives actually have the gall to accuse the liberals of treason (cf. Ann Coulter's book).

The conservatives recognize the liberals' assault on civilized values, but then proceed to abandon those values just the same; the only difference is superficial: instead of the liberals' angry, nihilistic orgy, the conservatives surrender America in their Sunday school suits while eating pie.

Until the President takes real military action against terrorists -- meaning the states that sponsor them: Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran -- we will all remain in great danger, and speeches like this will remain an indecent insult to Americans.

(#52) Gary Bruce:

This bullshit about our appearing "neutral" in the Mideast gets us nothing from anyone politically, so why does he keep at it--to satisfy the moonbats at the Stateless Department?

I read that as a favor to Tony Blair - a last ditch effort to save his job.

#60 The New Guy

Welcome to LGF. I was wondering the same thing. Andrew pointed me to Instapundit with some good info on that.

#60 Neu Guy

Note that the Lady in the photo is tearing up Ol' Glory. Well, at least she not an American, otherwise she might end up the St. Rachel Of Pancakes house of notoriety.

OT:

I'm sure we were all stunned by the shocking news about a well-known figure. Maybe people suspected that he was harboring a sordid secret, but to have it be made public so baldly is disillusioning. After all the adulation and goodwill everyone showered on him, he hauls off and slugs us in the gut with a disgusting revelation like this.

I refer, of course, to John Scalzi's recent admission that he is friends with Ted Rall. Maybe I'm the last to know, but I still feel so used!

I don't do this often, but in the comments at that post, I penned a fisking of Rall that, IIDSSM, isn't half bad. I invite you to go and look.

#55 The_New_Guy

Damn, good opening comments for a new guy! I hope you decide to change that name to something more suiting of yourself. Welcome

#62 bigel

That's not fair! At least you have ME to get pissed at. What LGFer can I get pissed off at now?

Funny, you claimed I didn't attack others like I do you. I find it amusing that you ignore for the most part when I agree with you.

#63 Nico Belakhof

The Bush policy -- the ACTUAL policy, not the stated policy -- is one of inaction, delay, and appeasement.

You can't be serious in that opinion. The taking down of 2 despot goverments in less the 2 years is inaction? Establishing a democracy in the Middle Fricken East is appeasment? Delay? I'm in awe of your blindness.

Alas,

It is our poor girl in the pink tank again, she looks deathly bored with the whole event. I fear for her upbringing:

drooping main gun

#32 I agree with you. I was disappointed that there was no mention of the Italians who had died.

Bigel,
for what its worth: I enjoy seeing Reaganite pound the snot out of you when you beg for it. You can be pissed at me if you like.
And just for fun ...
God Bless Bush!

Can any of our British friends tell us if the speech was shown on BBC live, in full? If so, what was the reaction to it?

I ask because any average Brit who got his/her view of Dubya from the BBC probably had a hard time recognizing the leader giving the excellent speech...

DAMN, that is one fine speech.

I am proud, actually proud, at the moment to be an American and a Republican.

@74 KevinV

If you're feeling that proud you should shake it on down to a base movie theater and watch the film they show before the movie.

It's a standing joke in our family that no matter how cheesy it is, we all get teary eyed when the plane breaks away from the formation. And my brother always says it should be shown every morning in schools.

My Dad still claps and cheers at the end of it (of course, then his flashbacks to Nam kick in and we all have to watch We Were Soldiers when we get home).

#74 KevinV

I am proud, actually proud, at the moment to be an American and a Republican.

I always have been, and always will be.

"So came the Captain with the mighty heart;
And when the judgment thunders split the house,
Wrenching the rafters from their ancient rest,
He held the ridgepole up, and spiked again
The rafters of the Home. He held his place—
Held the long purpose like a growing tree—
Held on through blame and faltered not at praise."

Somewhat OT, but pertinent: Just saw a particularly hard-hitting CNN piece about al Queada and associated Islamist groups, especially in Asia. The reporter, Maria Reesa(?) interviewed people who said, among things:

- that al Quaea is like Communism in that it has an agenda to alter history through conquest;
- while the majority of Muslims are moderate, they are ineffective because "the radicals have a program; the moderates have no program";
- the Islamist groups like J.I. that are associated with al Quaeda have been acting in a co-ordinated way with the aim of creating a megalithic Islamic nation in Southern Asia, reaching as far as Australia.

Also shown was an Islamic school in Malaysia where, for many years, recruits have been groomed for al Quaeda service.

I know this kind of stuff is same old, same old to anyone who reads LGF on a regular basis, but to see it on CNN, that bastion of namby-pambyism, was something of a shock. I hope it opens a few more eyes to what's really going on in this world.

#75 MilBrat

I remember those AAFES pre movie National anthems... they were great...The one I remember starts off with a sub cruising on the surface, then shows an M1 tank jumping a ditch.

...On the other hand, I can't stand the Lee Greenwood..."Proud to be an American" song. It drives me nuts. The National Anthem is good enough.

All OT I know, home to dinner!

I've actually seen a marked turn-around in the crap CNN shovels lately. I'm sorry to say that with four kids, homeschooling, and helping out at church I only have time for "McNuggets" of news and LGF when I can catch a log on.

However, since I was stuck with CNN, I've noticed that they've been a little less America-bashing lately.
They actually did a pretty extensive interview with the guy who just released, "Beyond Baghdad," which I plan to buy for husband to read when he gets home. Since he (the author) advocates hitting back hard in the Sunni Triangle, it was something unexpected.

Brilliant speech! The use of humor and recognition o f the protests as an the free excercise of speech, concluding with the reminder that they have that in Iraq now was superb.

The little whack at the French was also a nice touch.

The recognition that the days of tolerating tryants and marriages of convenience are over. Saudi Princes and Palestinian mobsters take note.

I saw the speech on CNN in the student commons. Didn't get to see the whole thing, but I saw it from the beginning for, hmm, at least 15 or 20 minutes.

Very impressive, indeed.

OT

MILBrat,

Sounds like your father and mine could spend hours telling war stories to each other 'bout the 'Nam.

Many of his peers and friends were in the Ia Drang valley during that time

now I really gotta go...

Here is a good perspective of the Bush-Blair Relationship from the side of London. Warning New York Times Registration needed.

Hug Them Close

How appropriate that today is the anniversary of the Gettysburg Address.

140 years later and, once again, the Nation is fighting for it's survival.

@84 John Gibbon

If you check back...

My father AND my mother - they were both in then. It runs in the family. Maybe our folks have met at some American Legion function... or VFW...

If I could straddle some middle ground here, I would say great speech, except for the Palestinian piece, and that while we have dismantled two Islamofascist dictatorships in two years, we really could do much more. I look forward to Bush's reelection and Operations Iranian and Syrian freedom for starters. Let's Roll.

#81 militarybrat

I nowhere near as busy as you, but I don't watch much TV news these days either. And I expect to watch even less in the coming days as the renewed Michael Jackson feeding frenzy takes over. (Prior to the report on al Quaeda, Aaron Brown was interviewing three people about the Jackson situation on half the screen; on the other half, was an airplane, which may or may not have contained Jackson, taxiing down a runway and finally taking off. Not exactly O.J. Simpson in a white Bronco, but still a foretaste of what's to come.)

Islam and the Muslims

Muhammad brought down from heaven and put into the Koran not religious doctrines only, but political maxims, criminal and civil laws, and scientific theories. The Gospels, on the other hand, deal only with the general relations between man and God and between man and man. Beyond that, they teach nothing and do not oblige people to believe anything. That alone, among a thousand reasons, is enough to show that Islam will not be able to hold its power long in ages of enlightenment and democracy, while Christianity is destined to reign in such ages, as in all others.

Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-59)

bigel,
I didnt assume a thing. I said God Bless Bush! because I meant it and it gives me pleasure to say it. This thread is about Bush, remember?

I intended to mention this much earlier in the thread, but, as always, life intruded. As I listened to the President's speech this afternoon, that quotation by Shakespeare popped into my head: "Some are born great; some achieve greatness; and some have greatness thrust upon them."

I think history will show that George W. Bush, who certainly was not "born great", and who, through sheer accident of fate may have had "greatness thrust upon him", will ultimately "achieve greatness."

I think he's already well down that road.

#90: Gary O'Brien

Great quotation. We could need many de Tocquevilles today not only in France, but in all of Europe. Great writer.

@89 scaramouche

I wish I could say that I didn't believe that split screen dealie, but...

Did they air the Bush's speech? I wouldn't be surprised if no.

I seem to remember a while back when Bush gave a statement about something and the networks decided it wasn't important enough to cover.

OTOH, some of the reason for their anger at Bush (not that this justifies anything) was explained to me this way:

Apparently a lot of the press is angry at how far they are kept from Bush. Now, I can understand he doesn't want to deal with them, press the flesh with them, whatever because they have been so hostile to him. Then they get more hostile because they feel they are being kept from some insane conspiracy meeting.

Sounds like Napoleonic Syndrome to me (on the part of the Press, that is).

#81 militarybrat 11/19/2003 06:03PM PST

I've actually seen a marked turn-around in the crap CNN shovels lately.

I'm afraid this will soon disappear. The media are very sensitive to the momentum of power gradient. The moment American assertion slows, they immediately come back with their "resistance fighters" crap.

If you follow campaigns, the papers and TV are always on the side of perceived winner, in the short term. In the long term, antiamericanism reigns.

I get my news once a week only (Debkafile), so avoid this whiplash.

Julio

Duh, I meant "Napoleonic Complex."

Tired. Long Day. Still have to get kids from CCD.

I'm generally not a fan of Bush, but I must say that speech gave me something I haven't felt in a long time regarding the Middle East: hope.

Let's hope he sticks to his guns.

Josh

Sorry if this has been said here already...

Great speech by President Bush, but what's with criticizing Israel for the security fence again?

With his recognition of militant Islam's imminent danger, you'd think he'd recognize that a fence is the minimum a civilized country under attack would do.

#83 Kylaer

I hope he didn't mispronounce "nuclear" (nukeelar).

(#92) scaramouche:

Great quote, but we shouldn't forget he's the grandson of a Senator and the son of a President - some would consider that "born great," I suppose. He was not born without certain advantages.

(#98) Nekama:

Great speech by President Bush, but what's with criticizing Israel for the security fence again?

I commented earlier that I thought it was throwing a bone to Tony Blair.

It will be interesting to see if he repeats it again in the SOU next year.

if this speech and the last one on democracy in the middle east were given by a kennedy or fdr then the harvard hagiographers would be having a field day telling us how brilliant, succint and inspiring they were in the glow of camelot--how churchillian in their forewarning of the evils we are up against--how courageous in the light of explaining why the use of our military might is justified--alas there is no ass kissing arthur schlesinger jr. or james reston to tell us how this young president, with humor and wit has discoursed with soaring rhetoric in the defense of democracy and freedom--he's not one of theirs,the playa haters--so he's a dodo--but i'm telling you those last two speeches are among the finest political speeches any president has made in our recent past and maybe in the history of the republic--the motherfucker can preach-say amen-pretty soon when you look up the word "underrated" in the dictionary there's gonna be a picture of gwb--take it from me a former dem whose now a post 9/11 banana republican

#17 Halflife

I got so infuriated, I had to turn the damn radio off.

The speech was delivered during my morning commute. Not a single radio station here carried it. I was somewhat stunned; I suppose I shouldn’t have been.

Did any of the networks carry it? Or just the cable outlets?

Q: How do you pronounce "nuclear"?

A: If you have your finger on the button, any fucking way you please.

On the BBC website I noticed this gem of a comment:

I run a popular mobile phone ringtone website. We decided to offer a free "Stop Bush" logo on Monday to coincide with the State visit. Already almost 2000 free "Stop Bush" mobile phone pictures have been downloaded by teenagers in the UK. The interest has been incredible - already it is the most popular logo that we have ever offered from our website. This indicates to me that there are hundreds of thousands of teenagers out there who are interested in politics and who object to the way that George Bush has orchestrated himself recently.

My little brother and his teenage friends have decided that they love the slogan "Stop Bush". Why? Well, I gather it has something to do with preferring shaved pussies! (Honest.)

(Also, how can someone "orchestrate himself"? Help me out here, guys, please?!)

#70 Egfrow:

You can't be serious in that opinion. The taking down of 2 despot governments in less the 2 years is inaction? Establishing a democracy in the Middle Fricken East is appeasement? Delay? I'm in awe of your blindness.

Why did Pres. Bush waste 6 months at the UN begging dictators like Syria for permission for the US to defend itself? If that isn't delay and appeasement, what is?

Removed a despot from Afghanistan? Last I heard, Usama Bin Ladin was still active there because the President relied on local tribes (which may have been bribed to let UBL escape) and not enough US troops so as to not offend the locals. And now he is allowing Afghanistan to set up an Islamic government.

As far as Iraq: Normally, it is extremely moral to remove a dictator like Suddaam Husayn -- but not until much more dangerous threats to the US that are destroyed first, namely Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran. Instead, Saudi Arabia remains "Our Friends the Saudis".

Furthermore, Pres. Bush has increased support for despots: he waived federal anti-terrorism laws to extend hundreds of millions of dollars to the murderous Arafat regime and to keep the PLO office open in DC, has allowed US oil companies to start new oil exploration work for Syria, and has worked to suppress the Syrian Acceptability Act (which would impose sanctions on Syria)

And what is Pres. Bush doing about the N. Korean and Iranian Nuclear programs? Nothing.

The movement to oust anti-American Venezuelan dictator Chavez collapsed after the Bush administration failed to recognize it; now, Al-Qaa'ida has apparently established itself in Venezuela.

The Bush admin has failed to call for Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon (Colin Powel even asserted that the Syrian presence there was not an occupation). The result: Lebanon has become a training ground for Al-Qaa'ida attacks in East Africa, and various factions attacking Israel.

Americans must realize that Pres. Bush is continuing the decades-long failure to respond to terrorism that got us to where we are now; a failure by Democrats and Republicans alike (what did Pres. Reagan do in response to attacks against the US marines, embassy, consulate, and civilians in Lebanon, or the US hostages in Iran? Nothing!)

For decades US administrations have used, as an excuse for inaction, the idea that the terrorists were "shadowy", unknown operatives. That excuse eventually wore thin, and now Pres. Bush is using the excuse of Iraq to avoid having to take on the far more important threats.

Don't let the scale of the US military action in Iraq fool you; a morally strong response to terrorism does not just mean a strong military response; it means a strong military response against the right target!. The war against Iraq allows the administration to delude itself and the voters that something is being done in response to 9-11.

It like someone with an obsessive-compulsive personality disorder, who intensely goes after a goal to avoid having to address the real problems in their life -- often this is an otherwise healthy pursuit such as a job or even cleaning ones house.

#99 K.

I hope he didn't mispronounce "nuclear" (nukeelar).

I hope he did. I have a socialist friend who is provoked into frenzy by the liberties Dubya takes with our native tongue. Funny as hell to watch (my socialist buddy, not POTUS).

I think its wonderful what the Pres is trying to do vis a vis with the Middle east and Islamic countries...

However, I simply warn all of us not too get to excited about this...as Robert Spencer and other writers of Islam warn, unless the core doctrines of this cult are changed, nothing will change in this racist anti woman cultures...

And folks, you can lead a savage to water, but you cannot make said savage drink from the fount of reason and freedom...

Islam in its pure and honest form is at odds with everything that is decent...eventually, I have to agree with another poster...once Muslims explode a WMD in our Western Countries, then we will have to respond by eliminating Mecca...mayby then they will get the message we are serious...

In the meantime, the best thing we can continue to do is to destroy Islam from the inside exposing what a fraud and murderous charlton and rapist Muhammad was...

An Ex Muslim is a wonderful member of society ... no longer moved by hateful Islamic teachings...and we are seeing Millions leave islam because of this very think...exposing Islam!!

For those hateful Muslims that want too kill every Jew and American, they must be destroyed...just as we destroyed Nazism, Islam must also be destroyed eventually!!

Devonator

#99

It's "NEW-Q-ler", not "nukeelar". And it is the correct -- i.e. Texan -- pronunciation.

PS - For all you Brits: the correct pronunciation is not "JAG-you-ahhr", it's "JAG-wire."

One of my favorite excerpts:

"Europe's peaceful unity is one of the great achievements of the last half-century. And because European countries now resolve differences through negotiation and consensus, there's sometimes an assumption that the entire world functions in the same way. But let us never forget how Europe's unity was achieved -- by allied armies of liberation and NATO armies of defense."

Nothing like a friendly reminder.
 

OT: A bit on Robert 'The Butcher' Mugabe.

[Link: frontpagemag.com...]

There will be no surrender to the worldwide jihad movement as long as Dubya is president. And that is good news for the free world.

The bad news is that so much of Europe is dhimmitized in its thinking, and incorrectly thinks that it can avoid being targeted. They think that if they feed the crocodile, they won't be eaten. But they are wrong; if they succeed in feeding the crocodile, the crocodile will become stronger, and they will be eaten at the appropriate time.

Radical Islamism is so extreme in its goals and methods that appeasement cannot possibly work, just as it could not work with Nazism. At the time of Munich, Churchill's views were unpopular -- but history showed him to be right. And history will show Dubya to be right in opposing the successors to Nazism.

Amazing speech. VOT Guardian arse writes arse-drivel.

OT: Saddam the Hippie, The NYT says so

[Link: www.nationalreview.com...]

1. "We seek a viable, independent state for the Palestinian people, who have been BETRAYED by others for too long."

2. "Leaders in Europe should withdraw all favor and support from any Palestinian ruler who fails his people and BETRAYS their cause."

So much BETRAYAL of the good folks of Palestine. Ye all know, them that danced in the street when the WTC went down. Aw shucks. I got a lump in ma throat.
PLEASE!

#105 Nico Belakhof
I disagree. I think attacking Iraq first was correct strategically, since they had the strongest military in the region (excluding Israel, of course).

OT: a bit on the Beeb's bias

*sigh*

[Link: www.nationalreview.com...]

Nico Belakhof is right but he forgets that Bush can barely get enough support for what he's done. There is not enough public support in the US for the kind of war that's necessary, so Bush in response is trying to frighten the Islamo-fascists into political reform.

That's his plan A. If it fails, plan B goes into effect by default. As Iron Fist pointed out, plan B only takes 30 minutes to execute but the fallout will be around for millennia, and I'm not referring to radiation.

So the Shrub is going to try the soft approach. But I don't think he's succeeding either--primarily with nuclear proliferation.

My prediction is that if he sees Iran going nuclear in the coming year, he knows that he will have to pull the trigger.

Ginger Liz,
I suppose by "orchestrate" they meant conduct, but a Loony Tune image of Bugs Bunny throwing his ears back like a maestro overruled using a small word when a big one sounds better. Stop Bush is an update on Kill da Wabbit. MMM, could be.

100 SoCalJustice

I commented earlier that I thought it was throwing a bone to Tony Blair.

What a shame that criticizing the most reasonable country in the region is what Bush feels he must offer to the winjing pommies.

Feh.

OT,
I might be the last person to learn about it, but go to google, type in "French military victories" and click on "I'm feeling lucky".

I liked the line :We must shake off failed...
As is sheikh off the sheikhs...lol

#97 Josh:

I'm generally not a fan of Bush, but I must say that speech gave me something I haven't felt in a long time regarding the Middle East: hope. Let's hope he sticks to his guns.

Don't hold your breath. Republicans have been talking big and doing nothing for decades - see Pres. Reagan's failure to respond to ME terrorism.

#98 Nekama

Great speech by President Bush, but what's with criticizing Israel for the security fence again? With his recognition of militant Islam's imminent danger, you'd think he'd recognize that a fence is the minimum a civilized country under attack would do.

Because, like most Republican, he has no clue about what America stands for and what it takes to defend it.

BTW, this extends to domestic affairs as well: Pres. Bush claims to be a supporter of freedom, yet applys steel tariffs, massively increases non-military spending, harasses and persecutes America's best and brightest (Bill Gates) and is trying to further Socialize medicine with the drug program.

#116 andrew

I disagree. I think attacking Iraq first was correct strategically, since they had the strongest military in the region (excluding Israel, of course).

They had the strongest military, but they were contained, and they were not actively involved in the ongoing war against the US to the extent that Saudi/Syria/Iran are (not withstanding the information released a few days ago). In attacking Iraq, Jihaadists are being drawn in from Syria and Saudi; if Syria were attacked first, I don't think Suddam would have sent forces there (but you may be right).

#112 EE

There will be no surrender to the worldwide jihad movement as long as Dubya is president.

Unfortunately, There will be no DEFEAT of the worldwide jihaad movement as long as Dubya -- or any other Republican or Democrat -- is president.

The American leadership and its intellectuals are morally bankrupt. The Left hates America's values and wants to destroy them -- while the Right has no idea what those values are, and is perfectly willing to surrender them.

#119 Gary Bruce

Nico Belakhof is right but he forgets that Bush can barely get enough support for what he's done. There is not enough public support in the US for the kind of war that's necessary, so Bush in response is trying to frighten the Islamo-fascists into political reform.

One reason why there is not enough public support is because Pres. Bush has spent so much effort arguing how America needs to have world approval, how it should not offend the sensitivities of our Muslim friends, etc. etc. etc.

In any case public opinion is irrelevant as to what the moral action should be. Morality is not a question of public opinion. Leadership means the willingness to act and the passion ability to persuade others of the rightness of your actions. If the president is unwilling to act to defend America, he should step down.

See also my comments in #63 and #105 above.

OT: Are you guys aware of John Loftus' latest information on 9/11 and spiked investigations of Al Qaeda?

[Link: www.john-loftus.com...]

The email report, written by Al Qaida's head of military operations, Mohammd Atef, describes Al Qaida's view of ongoing secret pipeline negotiations between the US oil companies and the Taliban to build a pipeline through Afghanistan.

This Atef report was almost certainly reviewed by the late John O'Neill at the time of the Embassy bombing, shortly after the Al Qaida report was written. At the time, O'Neill was the FBI agent in charge of the Embassy bombing investigation. The shocking pipeline information may explain why O'Neill became fixated about the Saudi-Taliban-Al Qaida relationship for the few remaining years of his life.

After O'Neill's investigations were repeatedly shut down by his superiors, O'Neill allegedly began making discreet inquiries to French intelligence using two reporters as cut-outs. Both reporters were known consultants for French intelligence and are specialists on both the oil industry and terrorism.

It is plausible that the French Government was upset at being shut out of the Caspian Basin deal, and may have been helping O'Neill behind the backs of his superior's in Washington. It does seem that the more that O'Neill learned, the less he was alowed to do with it.

"Well, George, that's all fine and well, but can we please just cut to the chase and give the palestinians their state, like, now, before Al Queida sets off a bomb in London? I mean, it's not really worth alienating a 300 million arabs and most of europe over a few jews, is it?"

/How Blair really wanted to respond to the Bush speach.

So Bush is a dope, huh?
Some dope.

Iron Fist
I didn't get the memo...what is your rule?

GWB's pronunciation of the word "nuclear" is incorrect. It may have entered into the American vernacular since I last checked ; but I do believe, Jimmah the Great was the first POTUS to pronounce it that way.

GeeDub says "Nuke-U-Lar". It is wrong. Just like folks who speak of Calvary as Cavalry.

Like a dripping tap...same lies, different day. Yawn...roll up the speech since it makes for a thoroughly absorbent toilet paper.

Tom Delay rawks the house again!

MORE GOOD NEWS:

83 percent of Afghan people surveyed say they are better off than they were 3 years ago, and are optimistic about being even better off a year from now:

[Link: story.news.yahoo.com...]

Take that, you stupid giant puppet people!

Iron Fist's rule:

If you think you might be too drunk to post, you are too drunk to post.

P.S. I'd add [dark, malevolent laughter], but I'm too drunk. Make that tipsy... even I can't get drunk on just one beer. P.P.S. zulu--sorry I missed the hora earlier, that would have been fun.

"Israel should freeze settlement construction, dismantle unauthorized outposts, end the daily
humiliation of the Palestinian people and not
prejudice final negotiations with the
placements of walls and fences."

Translation:

How can we be expected to carry on our war on terror when Israel insists on defending herself? Sheesh.

Fuck your hypocrisy, Mr. Bush.

#131 Trimmedbush

Is it physically painfully (as in an upset stomach, headache and tense muscles) to be on your side?

It seems to me that embracing lie after lie after lie must have some sort of toll on your physical well-being.

When I come across people puking in the street, should I assume they are with you or should I assume they are just like those tools in Russia that consumed a boatload of vodkee and ended up in the o so sanitary Russian ICU? Oh yeah, the winner died :)

The two most interesting passages from Bush's speech (and it's a tough competition, for this was a great speech):

"Arab scholars speak of a freedom deficit that has separated whole nations from the progress of our time. The essentials of social and material progress -- limited government, equal justice under law, religious and economic liberty, political participation, free press, and respect for the rights of women -- have been scarce across the region. Yet that has begun to change. In an arc of reform from Morocco to Jordan to Qatar, we are seeing elections and new protections for women and the stirring of political pluralism. Many governments are realizing that theocracy and dictatorship do not lead to national greatness; they end in national ruin."

"Perhaps the most helpful change we can make is to change in our own thinking. In the West, there's been a certain skepticism about the capacity or even the desire of Middle Eastern peoples for self-government. We're told that Islam is somehow inconsistent with a democratic culture. Yet more than half of the world's Muslims are today contributing citizens in democratic societies."

My question for the LGF faithful: do you really believe that these passages are true, as I do? Or do you follow the path of seething lunatic Devon Hill in #107? What does Robert Spencer think of these passages in the speech? Charles himself has questioned the President's statements on this regard in an otherwise laudatory post on a prior speech.

(#138) Gordon

From Bush's speech:

Yet more than half of the world's Muslims are today contributing citizens in democratic societies."

I would say that more than half of the world's Muslims live in democratic or non-Arab societies, and many are indeed contributing citizens.

But there seem to be all too many Abu Hamzas and Sami al-Arians, and Middle Eastern Studies "professors" at Columbia, Georgetown, Berkeley etc. (who are not "contributing citizens" in the sense that much of what they do is profess anti-Americanism), and countless apologists - and the "moderates" and "radical liberals" are virtually silent.

#131 Trimmedbush

Like a dripping tap...same lies, different day. Yawn...roll up the speech since it makes for a thoroughly absorbent toilet paper

You may want to save that thoroughly absorbent toilet paper for next November. Here trolly trolly trolly. Here trolly trolly trolly. Good trolly. Whos a good trolly. Yes you is. Oh yes you is.

Nico, you wrote:

Because, like most Republican, he has no clue about what America stands for and what it takes to defend it.

His errors in the ME notwithstanding, I think Reagan had a damned good idea of what America stands for and what it takes to defend it. And I think Bush does too.

Obviously, judging from your post, you don't have any faith in the Dems either. So what option do we have?

Unfortunately, There will be no DEFEAT of the worldwide jihaad movement as long as Dubya -- or any other Republican or Democrat -- is president.

Well, since there's not a chance that anybody except a Republican or Democrat will be president in the forseeable future, I guess, according to your lights we're screwed.

If the president is unwilling to act to defend America, he should step down.

Why, if nobody else will defeat the the worldwide jihaad movement either? Your post reeks of defeatism.

I thought it was a FANTASTIC speech!! It makes the current nine Democrats running for President look like wimps.

I also liked how he talked about Tony Blair (without mentioning him by name). You can really get a sense of what those two have been through and have yet to go through.

This President will not BLINK and we are blessed to have him as our President.

Gordon #138 writes:

My question for the LGF faithful: do you really believe that these passages are true, as I do?

The silence of the "moderates" is deeply troubling.

You should pose your question to the "moderate" Islamic Supreme Council of America, based in Washington DC (President Bush is on the front page of the website):

Individual Freedoms in Islam

The object of rule in Islam is to implement God's Law -- that legislated in the Quran and Hadith, known as Shariah (Islamic law). The ruler who does so is to be followed, and the one who does not is to be corrected.

[Link: www.islamicsupremecouncil.org...]

How do you feel about living under Shariah?

I hope reform of the Arab/Muslim world is possible, because if it's not, the logical conclusion of events is not pretty...
 

Cycle of Violence Watch in al Reuters

An Ecuadorean tourist became the latest victim of the cycle of violence, shot as she made her way through the passport check on the border with Jordan near the Red Sea resort of Eilat.

The gunman, a truck driver from an Islamist area of Jordan, passed through the Jordanian border terminal and crouched among cattle trucks lined up at the Israeli terminal before opening fire from 20 yards.

I suppose it was a cycle of violence because Ecuadorean women in Israel frequently shoot into Jordan?

And for reasons I can't quite understand, Bush is making noises about the jihad filter security fence again.

#140 Right Wing Conspirator

Whos a good trolly. Yes you is. Oh yes you is.

I like your creative use of grammar. :-)

Well Gordon, Devon was a little over the top but he understands that the Muslims really believe the rhetoric of, “shaking the ground under the unbelievers feet…etc. etc.” ad nauseum. What reasonable people like you and Bush just can’t seem to get their brains around is that these Muslims want to kill us because we don’t share their religious beliefs. They don’t want “democracy, whiskey, sexy” because it’s not in the Koran. They want to kill us and have the entire world be in submission to their “G-d.” Nothing less will placate them.

Bush has to spin this bullshit about promoting democracy, capitalism and the rule of law in the umma because the international system of currency depends on it. Over the years, we have pumped trillions of dollars into the Middle East through oil sales, and to keep the system in equilibrium, they must put that money back. If they don’t, the entire house of cards collapses. Unless we want to revert to a nation of subsistence farmers, we have to play the game. And that game is jaw-jaw, prick-prick and jaw-jaw some more.

How long can we hold off the murder of the kufrs and still preserve the international monetary system? Only G-d knows.

#145 ordog

Just think of how you call a puppy. That is what I was trying to duplicate.

#74 KevinV 11/19/2003 05:46PM PST
I ask because any average Brit who got his/her view of Dubya from the BBC probably had a hard time recognizing the leader giving the excellent speech...

Heard a clip today of Sir David Frost saying almost exactly those words.

#125 Nico Belakhof 11/19/2003 07:36PM PST
Don't hold your breath. Republicans have been talking big and doing nothing for decades - see Pres. Reagan's failure to respond to ME terrorism.

Gawdammit. I was willing to give your confluence of RRR & LLL nonsense a wide birth, but that statemen alone speaks of yor HUGE gross willful ignorance.
I'm betting your little foam-spewing mouth wasn't even BORN when American hostages were released after 444 days of imprisonment, and the VERY EVE of Reagan's first Inauguration. Then there was that tiny little thing that took up most of the 80s - breaking the back of Communism.
OR maybe you are wholly unaware of the 'freedom of navigation' exercises in '80, '81 against that modern-day Barbary Pirate, Qaddafi? Pushing our Carrier Battle Groups within his 'Line of Death' across the Gulf of Sidra. Twice shooting down agreesor Libyan MiGs who attempted to shoot down our own fighters. Whom we bitch-slapped so hard on 15 Apr 86 that Libyan podium-thumping and terror-support dried up substantially.
OR maybe you choose to ignore our proxy fight via the mujahadeen, which gave the Soviets their own 'Vietnam' in Afghanistan, forcing their withdrawal, and speeding the collapse of Communism.
OR maybe you were clueless about the Leadership provided in 1990 by George Bush Sr, leading the Coalition that pounded the shit out of Saddam's forces in '91, driving his Divisions from Kuwait, destroying multiple Iraqi armored divisions, killing some estimated 100,000 Iraqi troops in 100 hours, all with a staggeringly LOW loss of Allied lives?

Sorry that wasn't 'enough' for your tantrum-throwing ass.
Were you even aware of these things? Or are you intellectually dishonest enough to have known them, and ignored them when you said "Republicans have been talking big and doing nothing for decades".

Nico, I'm' guessing that since you apparently
wrote this, you have SOME capability to learn and analyze history. So perhaps you can understand that speaking in gross exaggerations does NOTHING for your Cause.
And in the context of that post, I'm guessing you are a Lebanese Christian. Sorry the USA hasn't done more to remove Syria's / Hezbollah's / Iran's boot from your neck. It's coming in 2005. Be ready.

I think Reagan was a great President, but the appropriate response to the Hezbollah bombing of the Marines was obvious. Hezbollah is an Iranian and Syrian puppet. One or both of those countries should have faced a devastating air strike(s).

Since Israel had just finished smoking much of their air force, Syria would have been target number one.

The failure to respond forcefully only encouraged the jihadis.

Jeez, Until I reread the nick I thought VFI had suddenly developed a brain.

I agree. A place the blame for the Beirut Marine Barracks bombing squarely on the US State Dept, for without their meddling bullshit, the Roles Of Engagement would NOT have had Marines Guards standing their posts in what was essentially a hot war zone with UNLOADED weapons. State insisted. US Marines (and several members of other branches) Died, for State's arrogance / ignorance.

That we pulled out right away I also blame on State. The whole batch of careerist mofos there need to be Purged.

#150 Ed Moran

Last to know Ed??

The wicked witch is banned.

'Rules' (ROE)

I thought it was a great speech. I was glued to the TV the whole time, even though I really needed a cup of coffee. He hit all the important points, and told a number of uncomfortable truths, diplomatically.

Did anyone else notice the lack of applause? The vast majority of his intended "applause lines" were greeted by silence, and it sounded like some were only applauded by the Americans. A pretty cool reception, I thought, for a speech that was likely historic.

Omigoodness. On the way up there, I bought a bag of pre-shelled sunflower seeds. 5 servings per bag, 5 grams carbohydrate, but four grams of that were fiber!

So a big bag of sunflower seeds, with like 30 or 40 grams of protein, and only 5 grams effective carbs.

On the way home, at the Exxon in Decatur, Texas on US 287 ( the Denver to Beaumont highway, ie the "thinking man's Route 66") I got a smaller Planter's bag of shelled seeds, but they were too salty.

hey, Mr. Peanut, not so much salt.

BTW,

The gunman, a truck driver from an Islamist area of Jordan

is there a non Muslim section of Jordan?

What thread?

What comment?

What did she do to get the boot?

Why did Pres. Bush waste 6 months at the UN begging dictators like Syria for permission for the US to defend itself?

The warp drive and the transporter were down, so we had to send 170,000 troops and their equipment by old fashioned ships and planes. That took time. Keeping the UN occupied was a harmless diversion, and there was always a chance it might pay off.

Atlast, the President has made the right remarks... lets say, a bit more truth has come out againts the tendency to be PC.
I think the protests pissed BUsh off to speak his mind. May the protest continue to educate us on how brave this war should be fought against Terror!

#131 trimmedbush

you are going to need more than toilet paper in the next election cycle. a good sedative is in order when the democratic nominee is soundly defeated. your cynicism stinks.

#156 Ed Moran

Overstayed the welcome I believe

Banned to the 6th circle of Hades.

LMG writes:

Did anyone else notice the lack of applause? The vast majority of his intended "applause lines" were greeted by silence, and it sounded like some were only applauded by the Americans. A pretty cool reception, I thought, for a speech that was likely historic

I noticed it too. Despite losing their empire sixty years ago, the whole anal-retentive bunch just can't abide us peasant mongrels being the defender of the free world.

As Mark Steyn pointed out this week, we're too Christian, too Jewish, too decadent, too stupid, too imperialist, ... and just not good enough in their eyes.

I long ago learned to ignore the Eurotrash when their envy and contempt shine through--whether personally or politically.

I hope he didn't mispronounce "nuclear"

Of course he did. You want him to blow his cover?

And folks, you can lead a savage to water, but you cannot make said savage drink from the fount of reason and freedom...

But you can always go to Plan B and drown the bastard.

#125 Nico Belakhof

Republicans have been talking big and doing nothing for decades - see Pres. Reagan's failure to respond to ME terrorism.

I suppose the fact that the Cold War was won due to former President Reagan’s and the first President Bush’s actions qualifies as “nothing.” I do think that former President Reagan’s response the Beirut bombing was a mistake, but we had our focus in another direction at the time.

Because, like most Republican[s], he has no clue about what America stands for and what it takes to defend it.

LOL! That’s a joke, right? I was part of what it took to defend this country during the last gasp of the Cold War. We won and I saw *up close* how we did it.

Remind me. Which party was in the Executive Office during that time?

Since you obviously have disdain for both parties, how would *you* handle our defense?

Well, defending the pink tanks as clever irony and social criticism was a bit much...

Some people here clearly can't grasp the concept of political theatre. A papier mache pink tank is evidence of 'loons'? - Surely not! Only macho metal tanks need apply for making a polital point. Someone takes a clearly sarky mental commision case against G.W and all capacity for Irony goes awol?

I don't know what we'll do without our resident LLL poster. Couldn't we commute appeal to Charles to commute her sentence to two weeks suspension, and then let her post again, with some kind of clever HTML script that replaces "Ireland" with randomly changing, vaguely offensive words, so she'd show up as View from Bottom of Port-a-Potty or View from My Ass or whatever?

#165 Ed Moran

If that could be done, that would be funny as hell.

And if you really want to know how good this speech is print it out from the White House website and read it, in fact read it two or three times. This one along with the first one at the UN can stand alongside any political speech in my memory and I go back to Churchill.

143 William

that web site has a question window...

should I ask them regarding

The object of rule in Islam is to implement God's Law -- that legislated in the Quran and Hadith, known as Shariah (Islamic law). The ruler who does so is to be followed, and the one who does not is to be corrected.

what if the majority non muslims find this offensive and seditious?

can non muslim lands expell and forbid muslims?

More of them here, uglier it will get!

#125, (and earlier) Nico Belakof. Half right, half cocked and half assed. Fully entitled to your opinion though, for what it's worth. Even if it is non-operative. Got any other ideas on how you would run the world if you had the chance.

maine's michael #136

Agree with you. This little bit debases the whole enterprise. I would have been a great speech were it not for this drop of poison. Too bad. The fellow does have a bad screw, always spoiling things in the end.

Hey Gordo... Devons not a raving lunatic, he's just a right thinking Albertan!!

Though I would agree that President Bush is by and large doing exactly what needs to be done. I disagree with the proposition that Islam can be moderate in its dealings with Christians, Jews and Hindus, to say nothing of its attitude towards atheists.

Bush is perhaps trying to paint a rosy picture because plainly if the world knew that we are in a strict religious war with the foundations of Islam panic would ensue.

I dont see any hope of Islam actually becoming the Religion of Peace...after all its entire history is that of being the Religion of the Sword.

Ed Moran,
you're SO playful! First you tell us exactly what you are eating or plan to eat, or ate recently, then you just blithely swing into a riff on the proper treatment for VFI, if repentant. (That better be stipulated) Oh and the weather reports! My sister lives near Tyler, so those come in handy. Its fun trying to keep up with you. And you make it all interesting. But is there a reason behind the weather and dining reports? Is it an Opus-like diversion when you are holding your temper? Just curious. Carry on.

#148 Rayra - No relation to Gamara:

Gawdammit. I was willing to give your confluence of RRR & LLL nonsense a wide birth, but that statement alone speaks of yor HUGE gross willful ignorance.

OK, so lets take a look at the Republicans' performance:

I'm betting your little foam-spewing mouth wasn't even BORN when American hostages were released after 444 days of imprisonment, and the VERY EVE of Reagan's first Inauguration.

OK, so the Iranians released the hostages (wasn't there some kind of bribe involved?) -- an then ... what? What was the US response? A few measly economic sanctions - and NO military action. Result: two more decades of Americans murdered by Iran.

(BTW, I can assure you there is no foam spewing from my mouth. OK, maybe a little, but that's just my mocha latte.)

Then there was that tiny little thing that took up most of the 80s - breaking the back of Communism.

It has been argued that Communism collapsed more due to the economic failure of Communism and less to US policy, but, as they say, that's beyond the scope of this discussion.

OR maybe you are wholly unaware of the 'freedom of navigation' exercises in '80, '81 against that modern-day Barbary Pirate, Qaddafi? Pushing our Carrier Battle Groups within his 'Line of Death' across the Gulf of Sidra. Twice shooting down agreesor Libyan MiGs who attempted to shoot down our own fighters. Whom we bitch-slapped so hard on 15 Apr 86 that Libyan podium-thumping and terror-support dried up substantially.

More like a slap on the wrist. Result: Just 2 years later, December 21, 1988: PAN AM 103 blown out of the sky by Libyan agents.

Incidentally, a few months ago, Libya finally confessed to the bombing. Guess what the US response was?

OR maybe you choose to ignore our proxy fight via the mujahadeen, which gave the Soviets their own 'Vietnam' in Afghanistan, forcing their withdrawal, and speeding the collapse of Communism.

Pres. Reagan should have taken the Soviets on himself, not using those crazy fanatics. Look at the result: The establishment of a fundamentalist terrorist regime in Afghanistan, the training of tens of thousands of terrorists, now spread throughout the world, and the encouragement and strengthening of the Islamo-fascist movement worldwide.

OR maybe you were clueless about the Leadership provided in 1990 by George Bush Sr, leading the Coalition that pounded the shit out of Saddam's forces in '91, driving his Divisions from Kuwait, destroying multiple Iraqi armored divisions, killing some estimated 100,000 Iraqi troops in 100 hours, all with a staggeringly LOW loss of Allied lives?

And ... quitting just 24 hours short of victory -- resulting in the mess we are in today!!! That has got to be one of the worst political-military decisions in history to leave Husayn in power.

Let me add a few more to the list: What about the Marine Barracks, the US embassy, the US consulate, TWA XYZ, etc. What was the US response? Nothing. Even the French -- yes, the weasely, cheese-eating, tanks-with-5-gears-in-reverse French -- bombed Syrian bases in Lebanon when their Barracks was bombed on the same day as the US's. Result: two more decades of Syrian/Lebanese-based attacks against the US and Israel

Nico, I'm' guessing that since you apparently wrote this, you have SOME capability to learn and analyze history. So perhaps you can understand that speaking in gross exaggerations does NOTHING for your Cause.

I wrote this because of my intense love of the US, its people, and its values of freedom and individualism. Inaction and appeasement by successive US administrations have resulted in an exponential growth of terrorism against the US, and continued inaction and appeasement will lead to even more. The only way that can be reversed is if the appropriate military action is taken, and that won't happen unless people -- especially those who know better (like LGFers) -- speak out on the Administrations performance.

Its no excuse that Pres. Bush is better than the democrats, or that the President should not be criticized in time of war. Those who love America do it no service by remaining silent.

And in the context of that post, I'm guessing you are a Lebanese Christian. Sorry the USA hasn't done more to remove Syria's / Hezbollah's / Iran's boot from your neck. It's coming in 2005. Be ready.

Right-o. BTW, you have no moral obligation to sacrifice your soldiers to liberate other people (contrary to Pres Bush's justification for Iraq) -- only to defend your country. Having said that, you're welcome to invade any time! We deeply appreciate the help.

#164 Juliette:

Since you obviously have disdain for both parties, how would *you* handle our defense?

1. Blockade, bomb, and/or invade Syria, Iran, and Saudi until they submit.

2. Stop bashing Israel and support their right to self defence.

3. Stop justifying your actions on self-abnegating grounds. Assert your right to self defence.

#169 gymnast:

As above. Also, you forgot "half-baked" ;-)

#141 Donna V

Well, since there's not a chance that anybody except a Republican or Democrat will be president in the forseeable future, I guess, according to your lights we're screwed. ... Your post reeks of defeatism.

My hopes or lack thereof are irrelavent to the facts: namely unless US policy improves, we're all screwed.

#174, Nico Belakhof. As you wish, and half baked. You also seem to forget one little thing about about the real world, Namely the bill, and the butchers bill. With any luck, before this is over, in what ever time it takes, the main port of entry to US bases in Iraq will be through Beirut and the Summerland Resort will be an RandR spot.

#175 gymnast

But: what is the cost to the US of not defending itself? Consider: The magnitude of deaths in terrorist attacks has been increasing by 10-fold every decade since the sixties.

In any case, were waiting for you! drinks will be on me, just pick the spot: BeirutNightlife.com

Check out the front page of the Times of London. And that's supposed to be the boringest London paper! Then again, I guess this is just part of Rupert's universe colliding. (cue clip of Seinfeld with George's explanation of worlds colliding). Then again, I guess they do run a column by Jonah Goldberg (although that may technically be the Sunday Times, but they're still closely related.

Re-instate VFI now. He/She was never abusive or Nasty just stupid and argumentative. It made the threads worth reading, seeing he/she squirm as the argument turned against him/her!!!

[Link: www.haaretz.com...]

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon downplayed suggestions of tension with his key U.S. ally Wednesday, after President George W. Bush toughened criticism of Israel's settlement policy and of the separation fence being erected between Israel and the West Bank.

Sources in Jerusalem, however, said they were satisfied with Bush's condemnation of the "old leadership" of the Palestinians, who profit from corruption and hamper the creation of a democratic Palestinian state.

...Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom said in response to Bush's criticism of Israeli policy that the American position is well-known, but Jerusalem has nevertheless decided to go ahead with construction of the West Bank fence.

"We have reached a clear and unequivocal decision to build this fence, to prevent the extremists from attacking us," Shalom told Army Radio from Vienna. "We are doing everything we can to put up this fence that will prevent infiltrations."

[Link: www.jpost.com...]

"There are issues in which we don't see eye to eye, but the friendship is continuous and lasting," Sharon told reporters on his way back from Rome.

He said, "Relations with the US are excellent and personal relations with Bush are excellent... There are issues on which there is disagreement, but this doesn't create a crisis. Israel's strategic cooperation with the US is good, and I don't suggest that you look at this as new tension."

Side note - I'm puzzled by this JPost dig at Blair:

Less helpfully – for Blair, at least – he insisted that "peace will not be achieved by Palestinian rulers who intimidate opposition, who tolerate and profit from corruption, and maintain their ties to terrorist groups.

Why, has Blair ever claimed or acted like that's the kind of people who should be supported and encouraged??

Dave (#178)

It made the threads worth reading, seeing he/she squirm as the argument turned against him/her!!!

Can I interest you in watching paint dry? Infinitely more interesting than Celtic Eva Braun.

Donna K, it is not "defeatist" to point out the deficiencies in the US's current policy towards defeating Islamic terrorism. Heck, Bush won't even publicly admit that it's the Islamists that we are actually fighting. In his speech, he continually referred to the fight against "terror" and "terrorism" -- in fact, he uses variations of those words 17 times. He only used the word "Islam" once, and it was not in connection with any of the occurrences of the word "terror".

The fact that our leaders won't even name the enemy in public is just another symptom of our lack of moral resolve to win this war.

Dave - 178

I will agree with Zulubaby; View from Idiocy was a boil that needed to be lanced.

Her debating style was...
Well, she didn't really have one since she didn't debate. She only pontificated her anti-semitic, anti-American, pro-terrorism, idiotarian, maoist / fascist beliefs as fast as she could get from her Elitest 101 PolSci handbooks.

Her contribution to the threads were...
Well, she didn't really contribute much - mainly just spouted off and then nik-picked anyone who decided to feed her.

Frankly, she reminded me of the reports about the group that is leading the organization of the London "Anti-War" movement. When questioned if they were anti-war - they said, no, they aren't anti-war, just anti-war on terror and anti-USA. I'm sure the worst day in her life was either when USSR fell, or the IRA agreed to the peace treaty.

Now she can add being stomped on by the great Lizard King.

OT: A bit on the Beeb...

"These well-meaning gentlemen of the British Broadcasting Corporation have absolutely no qualifications and no claim to represent British public opinion.They have no right to say that they voice the opinions of English or British people whatever.If anyone can do that it is His Majestys government;and there may be two opinions about that.It would be far better to have sharply contrasting views in seccession,in alteration,than to have this copious stream of pontifical,anonymous mugwumpery which has been dosed for so long."

Winston Churchill
From a speech in the House of Commons
Feb.22,1933

#178 Dave

I agree with zulubaby too. I often stopped reading threads after VFI succeeded in derailing them-- maybe because she reminded me of my mother's older sister. My aunt wasn't Irish or L3, but like VFI she enjoyed baiting other family members into getting angry and keeping arguments going. And like VFI, she didn't argue as much as pontificate in a condescending know-it-all fashion. I have the impression that I'm not the only LGFer who left certain threads early after VFI made her grand entrance, and I also think some people may have stopped reading LGF altogether because of her.

#172 Pierre

Mr. Bush is also well known for his religious tolerance. A quote from 27 August, 1987 whilst working on hsi father's campaign.

"No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

BTW - I don't know if you video of his speech but the white house had conveniently arranged for a banner to hang behind him saying "United Kingdom" in case he forgot where he was. I don't know if they provided a globe as well.

An update from London - as of 10:30 AM Thursday morning its looking very cloudy with forecasts for rain.

Not too cold - bout 50 or so - but grey grey grey

And it should come down in buckets.

The Stop the War ( ? ) march is supposed to gather at noon - and march at about 3PM toward Trafalger Sq - where they plan to topple their Bush Statue ( which is actually quite creative for that bunch )

But I think the statue is made of Paper Mache and might not be waterproof ( think of watching the Rose Bowl parade in a monsoon )

We'll see what the turnout is - I expect it to be low.

Only the real hard-core idiots will show up - not the masses that made the pre-war march such a huge event ( on a beautiful clear day also! ) - and there is a repeat of the kids being "organized" to skip school for the protest.

Of course, the last time this happened - about 50 kids showed up at the protest - and 50,000 skipped school.

Where were they? Several dozen were in the park next to my house smoking and screwing around.

#179 zaza

Side note - I'm puzzled by this JPost dig at Blair:

As a hostile but essentially accurate Washington Post article explains

Isolating Arafat is a central component of Bush's strategy for achieving peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Yet to many Europeans -- including Bush's staunchest ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair -- the U.S. refusal to deal with the elected president of the Palestinian Authority undercuts prospects for progress and belies the democratic ideals Bush advocates for the Middle East.

Can anyone picture any of the Democratic candidates giving that speech?

Not a chance because they don't believe in America any more.

#185:

That statement about atheists was made by Bush senior, not W. W has, at least once that I know of, spoken of "people of all faiths, and of none" just as Tony Blair has done.

Regarding the stop the war protest marchers, I stumbled across the Edinburgh march yesterday.

Well, when I say stumble, I mean I heard someone on a loudspeaker and the faintest sound of a cheer, but I couldn't find the buggers.

I did see a young pair of students walking about with their Bush and Blair war crimes placard. I felt like asking where the protest was but didn't want to keep them from their late night meal of Castro Socialist Paradise Unleavened bread and Sudanese Marxist Baked Beans.

I'm guessing that in many parts the Stop The War Coalition is less a movement and more a sect.

Re-instate VFI now. He/She was never abusive or Nasty just stupid and argumentative. It made the threads worth reading, seeing he/she squirm as the argument turned against him/her!!!

Er, I don't think that should be LGF's primary role, or even one of its more important roles. What you're suggesting is simply the reverse of of a troll's goal.

And remember, while we aren't paying directly for the bandwidth wasted by such nonsense, Charles is.

#187 Kolya: I hadn't even thought about the meeting-Arafat issue*, didn't even cross my mind. I thought it was implying some general support from Blair for terrorists, by picturing an anthisesis, and implying the whole "payback for Blair's support in Iraq line" which I personally think is total bs.

In any case, Israel has made a few exceptions: Israel opens door to special envoys who meet Arafat.

___

I've just heard the news about Turkey and the bomb in Iraq too. Bloody hell. Aren't they getting a bit too frisky there...

Just watched a bit of Bush and Blair joint conference on tv as well. All I have to say is kudos to them both.

I also am starting to better appreciate the reasons behind the US pressure to make Turkey enter the EU.

Maybe that's also part of what's being targeted by terrorists planning the attacks in Instanbul.

PS - Kolya #187 again on the Blair dig: my reason for puzzlement there has also to do wth the fact that the strongest proponents of the "let's keep meeting Arafat, why shouldn't we, elected president of the ANP blah blah" line is certainly not Blair but: Prodi*, Chirac, Solana, De Villepin, etc. in short the whole Brussels nomenklature. With which Blair doesn't actually have much in common. So I think it's rather irritating and stupid of the JPost to have inserted those digs right there, treating Blair with such contempt in the context of an article on Bush's visit and talks about Iraq and so on. Didn't add anything to the article.

* how come he's always untouchable even for the JPost? I'm also puzzled by that. It must be cheaper in all senses to have a go at one of the best *elected* leaders in the world than to denounce a few facts about a scum who sits unelected at the EU Commission. He's the one who's been insisting for ages on Arafat this and that.

#138 Gordon:

Pres. Bush was clearly referring to the two most recent Arab Human Development Reports published by the United Nations Development Programme. Here is a page listing reports recently issued by that body.

AFAIK, all of these reports used to be freely downloadable. Now, two require a $10 payment. Guess which two?

The reports are fine, but is there any Arab regime that intends to allow them any traction?

#38 Gordon: personally I have mixed feelings about those statements. Instant-gratification feelings aside, I certainly fully endorse their inspiring principles and the belief in democracy being a universal value and something every people is capable of. I also am increasingly seeing the need to insist on that, also as a political strategy in fighting - and isolating - terrorism. I'm just very skeptical on the practical possibilities for that vision to be accomplished in reality. Or rather, given the current premises. But that doesn't make it any less worthy. The current premises have to change so it has to start from somewhere.

I do think, whatever one thinks of Islam itself, it is important to encourage that change within Islamic society, communities, countries, etc.

And, what he says.

The despotism and brainwashing has to be addressed, and Bush addressed that in his speech. Iraq was a good start. Hopefull there will be more effects in practice, despite terrorism.

Did anybody see the press conference with Bush & Blair this morning? The best moment occurred when a British reporter asked the president what he thought of the "thousands and thousands of Britains protesting streets?" Bush just smiled and declared, "Freedom is beautiful!" The reporter was dumb founded!

Reminds me of those Mastercard commercials:

Papier macher puppet: $500
10,000 anti-Bush T-shirts: $50,000
Pink cardboard tank: $2000
President Bush pointing out America is fighting (once again) to protect your freedom: PRICELESS!

Genocide Gordon - Do you think sharia and dhimmitude is reconilable with democracy? Obviously we aren't going to have that in Iraq, so it wouldn't be the kind of islamic democracy you love (saudi arabia, pakistan, Iran, Nigeria). Devon said "the core doctrines of this cult are changed". Genocide Gordon, do you want the core doctrines of Islam which include jihad and sharia to me changed ?

Preview is my friend... to BE changed.

Check it. Jay Norlinger at NRO points out that the British elite feel the same way about Bush as they did about Lincoln 140 years ago.

London was altogether beside itself on one point, in especial; it created a nightmare of its own, and gave it the shape of Abraham Lincoln. Behind this it placed another demon, if possible more devilish, and called it Mr. Seward. In regard to these two men, English society seemed demented. Defence was useless; explanation was vain; one could only let the passion exhaust itself. One's best friends were as unreasonable as enemies, for the belief in poor Mr. Lincoln's brutality and Seward's ferocity became a dogma of popular faith.

Furthermore, Jay notes that the British of the time were basically the enablers of slavery, just as their counterparts today are the enablers of terrorism and Islamist oppression.

Reminds me of those Mastercard commercials:

Papier macher puppet: $500
10,000 anti-Bush T-shirts: $50,000
Pink cardboard tank: $2000
President Bush pointing out America is fighting (once again) to protect your freedom: PRICELESS!

#196 Kenneth: nice :-)

Am watching the Sky news coverage. They are all repeating the same mantra. Q-How do you think terrorism should be fought? A-Bush and Blair are the terrorists. Yawn.

And the first woman they stopped for interview was an American, lol... "Bush has no place talking of democracy cos he was not elected". zzz...

#195 Zaza, very well said. We can only hope that Bush is right. I am more optimistic about change in the Arab/Muslim world than most on this site, but it's certainly not a "done deal."

#197: AJ, I see you are a member of the Devon Hill/Ann Coulter, "convert them to Christianity and kill the rest" crowd - Chicken Littles with a vengeance. So you must think Bush's speech was a pile of crap. Also, I request that you find any posting where I said Saudi Arabia, Iran, Nigeria, or Pakistan was or is a democracy. My arguments have been about places such as Malaysia, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Albania, etc.; places that don't fit your apocalyptic world view of evil Islam.

#201 Gordon: I think the other important bit beside "ready and able to embrace democracy" is the "willing to" part, and that's where the problems are.

But the only possible sensible road is the one suggested by Bush. So in the end it's not even a matter of right or wrong policies, but necessary ones.

Obviously the more that idea of building democracy is pushed, the more the extremists come out to "resist" it - so that's why it does worsen terrorism in a way, in the immediate. I think that's inevitable. But it doesn't make the policy wrong, on the contrary, it just goes to prove how much it's opposed by those who want not the status quo to continue, but even worse despotism and tyranny to take its place.