Friday, November 10, 2006

The daily beat

More recent developments from Pajamas Media:

  • George McGovern, former senator, former presidential candidate, will meet with the 62-member Congressional Progressive Caucus to discuss the ideas in his new book Out of Iraq: A Practical Plan for Withdrawal Now.
  • Al-Qaeda Post-Midterm Statement: Abu Ayyub al-Masri, the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq, claimed in a new audio tape Friday to be winning the war faster than expected in Iraq, saying it had mobilized 12,000 fighters. The leader meanwhiled vowed his fighters will never rest until they have blown up the White House. The group also said it welcomed the Republican electoral defeat that led to the departure of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
  • “The fate that will befall all those millions of courageous Iraqis, showing the dye on their fingers after they had voted — in defiance of all the terror threats — will not come as a surprise to me, either. They are being sold out, as the Vietnamese were before them. But the consequences of abandoning Iraq will come home to the United States and the West, in a way Vietnam never touched us.” (David Warren)

  • Marjorie Cohn, president of the National Lawyers Guild, lays out plans to hold him accountable for breaches of international law and even war crimes sanctioned in Iraq and Guantanamo during his tenure.
  • Tigerhawk on the delight of Iran and China at a Democratic victory. "I am not suggesting that the Democrats agree with all the various dirtbags who are rejoicing their victory. I am, however, willing to say this: When you cite 'world opinion' of George W. Bush as a reason to vote against him or his party, you cannot then object if others cite the opinions of enemies and adversaries who delight in your victory."
  • Marjorie Cohn, president of the National Lawyers Guild, lays out plans to hold him accountable for breaches of international law and even war crimes sanctioned in Iraq and Guantanamo during his tenure.
  • "The Republican Party needs to wake up to the power of the BBC as a media player in America. Its online services, in particular, are widely read in the US and BBC foreign coverage informs how many US journalists see the world. I sat in the White House three years ago and recommended that the GOP develops a strategy to work with London-based media. I met other GOP officials with the same message earlier this year but nothing GOP appears to have been done" (Britain and America)

Commentary

As I remarked a few posts ago. This is what a rout looks like. A rout requires two things. An attacker willing to pursue and a defender with no other thought but to flee. You are watching the Left remember its genetic instincts in attack. Never did conservatives seriously entertain the idea of prosecuting liberals after an electoral defeat but liberals would. They intuitively understand the meaning of intimidation as applied domestically. I don't say this to disapprove, only to observe. Imagine what it was like during the Show Trials.

The more constructive function of a rout as applied to the defeated is that it provides the perfect litmus test for identifying real leadership. Not the old leadership. Their leadership is destroyed by the fact of the rout itself. What everyone fleeing in a rout instinctively looks for is a rally point. Someone who will stem the tide. Conservatives should be on the lookout for such a rally point. The chances are that the first rally points will be overwhelmed. Have another sandwich and look around. Another rally point and another will spring up. And finally one will hold. And the men beneath the banner are the leaders. Or some with potential.

Personally I think the Left is piling on too fast. Many are succumbing to the Bolshevik tendency to seize the "leadership of events". George McGovern, the War Crimes crowd -- they are scrambling over each others backs to grasp the reins. Set the agenda. Right now the Dem leadership -- whatever that is -- must be fighting for the wheel. Watch the gap open in Dem lines. But to exploit, the conservatives need a leader. Where oh where to find?

47 Comments:

Blogger redaktør said...

A strategy out of Iraq should include reform of US energy consumption away from oil and towards biomass fuels.

11/10/2006 01:23:00 PM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

"...But the consequences of abandoning Iraq will come home to the United States and the West, in a way Vietnam never touched us."

We have to stay in Iraq to keep that "domino" from falling? It's deja vu all over again, only the rate of returning caskets is different.

11/10/2006 01:34:00 PM  
Blogger buck smith said...

redaktor,

They dont want to kill us b/c we buy oild from. If we stop buying oil someone else will.

11/10/2006 01:36:00 PM  
Blogger charlotte said...

All’s going to hell. The Dems and Euros are going to hotbox/rundown Rumsfeld and other members of the Bush administration in hearings and criminal court, and al-Qaeda is already dancing on their graves and promising to desecrate them. Nothing but rough seas, major turbulence and treacherous curves ahead for the next two years.

And then, Democrat total disaster in ’08.

11/10/2006 01:36:00 PM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

buck smith wrote:

They dont want to kill us b/c we buy oild from. If we stop buying oil someone else will.

Back in 1997-98 there was a thing called "Asian flu" that pinched the economies of various nations in East Asia. Oil hit a low of $8 a barrel at one point. If we stop buying oil because, say, American nanotech ingenuity cooks up a biomass liquid fuels solution, someone else will buy ME oil, but they will be practically giving it away at that point.

11/10/2006 02:11:00 PM  
Blogger redaktør said...

Buck,

There's an assumption in your statement, that there will be an oil infrastructure in the ME to help extract the oil; an assumption I'm not so comfortable with.

11/10/2006 02:25:00 PM  
Blogger warhorse said...

"We have to stay in Iraq to keep that "domino" from falling? It's deja vu all over again, only the rate of returning caskets is different."

Hmmm ... the 'Nam era has never been my favourite bit of history. What exactly was the problem with the domino theory?

11/10/2006 02:43:00 PM  
Blogger dla said...

Step #2 of Al Qaeda strategy. Step #1 was to turn public opinion by feeding the MSM a steady stream of newsworthy violence. Osama's been thinking...

11/10/2006 02:45:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Have to say I'm fed up with the likes of David Warrens "noble purple-fingered, courageous freedom-seeking Iraqis" crap.

So are most Americans who have grown sick of watching these Arabs sit on their asses and cheer American deaths and say how much they hate the occupier - as US soldiers fighting the fight they refuse to join die for them.

That is why the election was as much about opining that what we have seen of the Iraqis has made the voters conclude the shitheads there simply aren't worth the lives and treasure we are expending open-ended under Bush's strategy. There hasn't been much evidence of courageous Iraqis. They ran from us in the Gulf War and in the invasion. And they run from Al Qaeda and the insurgents. But they have no problem being cowardly murderers who bushwhack Americans or one another for hatred or monetary gain.

Bush can talk all he wants about how "they are brave, noble people just like us". Warren and others should have realized by now Bush is clueless on Muslims. They are NOT "just like us", they DO NOT want "the same things". They want to get wealthier even if that means killing bystanders, they want their tribe to get more powerful by diminishing other tribes, and they do not wish to risk themselves for others.

“The fate that will befall all those millions of courageous Iraqis, showing the dye on their fingers after they had voted — in defiance of all the terror threats — will not come as a surprise to me, either. They are being sold out, as the Vietnamese were before them. But the consequences of abandoning Iraq will come home to the United States and the West, in a way Vietnam never touched us.” (David Warren)

What bunk. S Vietnam was a more populous, wealthier country than N Vietnam. What the South had was that the sons of the priveleged class were immune from the draft, the Chinese minority community saw no need to sacrifice when they were making serious money off the conflict, and most in the landholding class believed that fighting was a lower-class, peasant trade. A common observation by our grunts was of the masses of hundreds of draft age young men loitering about in the cities - and befuddlement on why they had been forced to fight halfway around the world for peers their age who thought military service was for lower class "loser and peasant Vietnamese" , not them.

When we began pulling out, it was those families of privilege that panicked and said we were "selling them out".

No, they sold their own country's future out to a smaller, weaker enemy. We didn't. They did. By refusing to look past their selfish concerns, to be willing to sacrifice for their nations future, they ensured their defeat. Not us. Not LBJ, not Nixon. Not the MSM. Them.

When we picked up the boat people, we should have screened and only let in ARVN and direct families of ARVN - and left the little city dudes too good to fight and the Chinese who thought the struggle was "not their business problem" to their own fate.

Now we have the same issue arising in the same sort of people in Iraq...except these are Muslims that according to polls, hate America and see infidels as the enemy.

What will we do when millions who refused to fight, declared they hated America, demanded Americans die for them instead - show up at our door and demand admittance as "entitled refugees from a land you sold out"? If our Sunni Iraqi killers come claiming Shiites are killing them like they did to the Shiites - and asking for visas, free scholarships, lifetime welfare, free medical care for a lifetime as other refugees here get? Or all the well-off Shiite families who refused to build a new Iraq and sat on their asses other than dipping their fingers in Bush's magic purple ink pot demand we let them in?

IMO, those worthless Arabs had their purple-fingered chance and refused to step up - and we shouldn't let any of them into the USA to add to the "sea the Jihadis can swim in".

But as of now, they haven't lost. It is high time that we say..."Shitheads, it's up to you! The days of Bush telling you that Americans would pay any price, make any blood sacrifice to help the "noble, courageous Iraqis" have gone on 3 years without any evidence you are worth it, and now those days are drawing to a close."

"Step up, or contemplate the Civil War so many of you want - and realize the world may not have a welcome mat laid out for your losers or endangered family in such a war - fleeing the country you refused to fight for."

11/10/2006 02:46:00 PM  
Blogger dla said...

Cedarford "So are most Americans who have grown sick of watching these Arabs sit on their asses and cheer American deaths and say how much they hate the occupier - as US soldiers fighting the fight they refuse to join die for them.
"

Step 1 has worked on you too. Osama's been thinking....

After all, can you really say that you understand the Iraqi people based on the tibits the MSM has fed you? Take a deep breath, exhale, relax....

11/10/2006 02:56:00 PM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

Hmmm ... the 'Nam era has never been my favourite bit of history. What exactly was the problem with the domino theory?

It was discredited by the lack of other dominoes (Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, Taiwan) falling to Communism when the Vietnam domino fell. Indeed, there was a reverse domino effect that started in 1989 with the fall of the Berlin Wall.

11/10/2006 02:59:00 PM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

cedarford wrote:

What will we do when millions who refused to fight, declared they hated America, demanded Americans die for them instead - show up at our door and demand admittance as "entitled refugees from a land you sold out"?

First they got to get to our door. From Vietnam, which has a gigantic coastline, they just got in a boat and headed out, and if they were lucky and eluded pirates, they made it to places like Malaysia or Thailand or the Philippines. None of them came directly to Long Beach California and said, "Knock knock." From Iraq, they would have to float down the Shaat-al-Arab, toodle around in the Persian Gulf, exit the strait of Hormuz, arriving finally in the wonderful Sultanate of Oman (I've seen it), home to camels, airstrips for C-17s supporting forward deployed US battlegroups, guys in striped pajamas and funny little hats, but not much in the way of irrigated land to support refugees. Republicans won't accept them as immigrants because they're not from approved bloodlines, and Democrats won't accept them as immigrants because they will probably vote the same way ex-pat Cubans in Miami do.

11/10/2006 03:14:00 PM  
Blogger wretchard said...

Up until recently there were a who flood of Afghan refugees who showed up in Australia. Australia! They'd go to Pakistan. Fly to Indonesia then hire a death ship with booking offices right next to the McDonald's near the UN offices in Jakarta and try to land in Northern Australia. The Navy kept intercepting them and the Left kept accusing John Howard of War Crimes. Often these ricket death ships would founder. But that was somehow a war crime too.

Then after Afghanistan was retaken from the Taliban, the refugee flow slowed to almost nothing. There was a deathly silence from the Left. Actually the Left was quite happy, in my opinion, to see the refugees drown by the dozen in the sea just so they could wring their hands in righteous pity. But I digress.

The real point is that in an age of air travel they will make their way to Cuba or to Venezuela or Mexico and from there essay the border. And it will be a war crime to stop them. If the distance between Afghanistan and Australia was insufficient why should the one between Iraq and America be a deterrent?

11/10/2006 03:28:00 PM  
Blogger dla said...

Woman Catholic wrote: [i]It was discredited by the lack of other dominoes (Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, Taiwan) falling to Communism when the Vietnam domino fell. Indeed, there was a reverse domino effect that started in 1989 with the fall of the Berlin Wall.[/i]

Hmmmm, not quite. Remember that the dominoes were stalled from 1965-1975 by American presence. 10yrs is a long time to keep pushing on the dominoes.

11/10/2006 03:55:00 PM  
Blogger charlotte said...

dla,

Glad you said that! Smart military historians I've known have said the same thing.

11/10/2006 04:02:00 PM  
Blogger BigSpaghetti said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

11/10/2006 04:16:00 PM  
Blogger BigSpaghetti said...

“It was discredited by the lack of other dominoes (Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, Taiwan) falling to Communism when the Vietnam domino fell. Indeed, there was a reverse domino effect that started in 1989 with the fall of the Berlin Wall.”

Was it discredited or did Reagan come just in time with the defense build up coupled with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan? Success in Afghanistan would have been one hell of a domino falling on the Middle East. Instead, the Soviets were worn out and out spent.

The 70s were not a good time for the United States and the momentum was not in its favor. Just because it took 8 years for the second domino to fall doesn’t mean it wouldn’t have. Sometimes I think that we changed course just in time and got lucky.

How about all those dominos in South America? Or aren't they dominoes because we fought and kept them from falling? Too bad it looks like they’re about to tip again. This time we don’t have the will or desire to stop them.

11/10/2006 04:20:00 PM  
Blogger BigSpaghetti said...

"So are most Americans who have grown sick of watching these Arabs sit on their asses and cheer American deaths and say how much they hate the occupier - as US soldiers fighting the fight they refuse to join die for them.
"

Maybe they didn't fight because they didn't trust we would stick around. Why would someone stick their neck out if they thought we might abandon them?

They were weak after the invasion and knew they needed us. As another poster commented I'm not willing to judge them so harshly based on MSM.

11/10/2006 04:29:00 PM  
Blogger Habu1 said...

Teresita,
Unless you're approaching your 60's then your "feel" for what Vietnam was all about is from books and film.
Just as I thought I "knew" what WWII was like and had discussions with that generation the recurring theme was the reality of it AT THE TIME OF THE EVENT...now that I am older I understand as I listen to people who either weren't born of were playground children recite to me what Vietnam and the 60's were all about.....ya can't do it with any credibility. Oh you can know the history but the tenor of the times will forever escape you, providing the history with only words on pages ..if you're a child of that era fine, if not please refrain from being such an authority on something you've only read about. Liv'n it and do'n it are vastly different than read'n about it.

11/10/2006 04:30:00 PM  
Blogger enscout said...

I'm not sure how much I believe in the 80/20 rule but perhaps some variant applies and, depending upon conditions, in some form everywhere. We certainly have our miscreants and, moving up through the rank & file of US populous, groups of undeserving hangers-on, the "just get by crowd, etc all the way up to the "20" group - the overachieving movers and shakers of the world that really initiate what happens for everyone else.

Iraq, I'm sure, is no different. Applied to the bizarre (in our worldview) culture of Islam, the rule takes on an entirely different character.

My point is that we have folks here in this great land of ours whom I consider nothing more than undeserving ingrates that live comfortable lives only because of great sacrifices made by others. I wonder what our grandfathers would think of the average 2006 "Joe" putting in 40-hour work weeks at the office, actually working 20 percent of the time and pulling down 6-figures. I'm sure they would say "What the hell; we were fighting for this?"

And I'm going to go on to say, as the great Americans that brought US to where we are today roll in their graves at the prospect, there are many, many others who are celebrating the recent elections:

-The Euro weenie ingrates,
-The undeserving underbelly of Americans
-Hugo, Fidel, Daniel Ortega & the Communistas
-The hard left, the Independents and the RINO's in the US
-The Chicoms
-The Greens & other anarchist groups
-The Socialists
-etc, etc, etc.
-Islam

Reminds me of the crowd celebrating the Death of Aslan in The Chronicles of Narnia.

George fits right in.

11/10/2006 04:31:00 PM  
Blogger Habu1 said...

I must say this new thread has the hawks ready.
The squishy types will have to formulate their excuses for Islamic-fascists vowing to blow up the White House. It should be good sophistry, no it'll have to be great sophistry.
Anybody detect any wiggle room in there for the USA not killing a few million of the bastards? A few hundred million.


When something's going wrong
You must whip it

now whip it
into shape
shape it up
get straight
go forward
move ahead
try to detect it
it's not too late
to whip it
whip it good

11/10/2006 04:38:00 PM  
Blogger frankwolftown said...

I hear all this fall out and can't help but think about the Dick Morris interview I heard this Thursday on Mancow.com Dick was talking about how during the last couple of Clinton years all the scandals were happening and Bin laden was planning 9-11. Now we have all this Starting with Bush and people forget the unspoken truth about 9-11. Which is we got off light. The terrorist evet that happens is goin to make katrina look like a pinic.

11/10/2006 04:45:00 PM  
Blogger Habu1 said...

Teresita,
Your selection of dominoes is incorrect.
You are also too smart to have left out Cambodia and Laos by mistake. You prostituted history to fit your "need" to be authoritative.
Go back and start counting the killing field of Cambodia and Laos. The THREE MILLION PLUS Cambodians who perished and the MILLION plus Laos.
Your meretricious adumbration is that of an acedemic sciolist.

11/10/2006 04:58:00 PM  
Blogger charlotte said...

Thank you, Habu!

11/10/2006 05:04:00 PM  
Blogger Thomas the Wraith said...

A rout indeed. The plot is hatched. Only the finer points remain to be determined. I can already envision the bumper stickers to get the troops home by Christmas '07. Will we leave Iraq in something resembling order in a year? Or will our leaders snap after a successful AQ attack kills more boys than they can stomach? Will we fold up the flag and shake hands with Iraqi officials on our way out? Or will we race for the last plane amid suicide bombs and Iranian rockets?

How long until the Brits leave? Now that they can see the writing on the mosque wall the clock is ticking in London. Blair is even more of a lame duck than Bush. As soon as Tony steps down the Brits are outta there. And that's only a matter of months now.

But the real threat is to what passes for our allies in the region. Every day after we leave Iraq the odds increase on an Islamist takeover of Egypt through revolution, coup or popular pressure, especially after Murbarak passes from the scene. I hope the King of Jordan has his plane fueled and lots of cash stashed in Zurich. The best he can hope for is to escape with his family and some money as Jordan falls to Islamists.

Why would these guys even want to be our allies after we leave Iraq? To quote someone, "when people see a strong horse and a weak horse, they naturally want to go with the strong horse."

11/10/2006 05:23:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

bigspaghetti - Maybe they didn't fight because they didn't trust we would stick around. Why would someone stick their neck out if they thought we might abandon them?

And maybe the S Vietnamese elites didn't fight for all their own perfectly understandable rationalizing excuses for risk avoidance.

It doesn't matter. The voters will not tolerate Americans long dying for a people that won't bother to sacrifice to save themselves voluntarily.

Just so they finally get there are consequences to fence-sitting. And those consequences are well-deserved events of their own making. Be it bored sons of Vietnamese landholders too good to fight and sitting the war out in cafes who ended up sitting in concentration camps.....or Sunnis that cheered as Americans burned alive in an IED-hit Amtrack now seeing Shiite death squads armed with hacksaws and power drills moving into their USA-vacated neighborhoods. Civil War can be a real bitch when you refuse to become involved and it somehow comes to you without anybody behind you to help..

As for the MSM skewing the news, and the reality of courageous freedom-loving purple-fingered Iraqis flocking to nonsectarian Army squads and police forces to create a modern western-style nation....Sorry. You need to go past "the MSM is always wrong!" to prove that view by providing alternate sources.
And the Brits, the Pentagon itself after all the happy talk, and milbloggers all say the Iraqis are NOT stepping up.

11/10/2006 05:24:00 PM  
Blogger tckurd said...

Cedarford: "It doesn't matter. The voters will not tolerate Americans long dying for a people that won't bother to sacrifice to save themselves voluntarily."

READIT you blathering gasbag: http://icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeaths.aspx

11/10/2006 05:57:00 PM  
Blogger NahnCee said...

Schwarzenegger is showing distinct leadership capabilities. Unfortunately, his daddy was a Nazi and he was born in Yurp, so that limits his potential.

Too, I'm not sure it's a rout, as much as it is stunned disbelief that the Dem's are actually already talking about impeachment and a bunch of other bullshit, when the reality most likely will be two years of unending hissing deadlock. I just don't see the Dem's actually having that much power to *do* anything. Other than cut off funding for this and that, and voters get very cranky when their government is shut down.

11/10/2006 05:58:00 PM  
Blogger tckurd said...

Cedarford, I so loathe you entirely, with your revisionist gassing:

http://icasualties.org/oif_a/CasualtyTrends.htm

11/10/2006 05:59:00 PM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

Wonder how many S. Vietnamese died fighting communism, and how many Iraqis have died fighting fascism?

I think it is more than C4's apparent "none".

11/10/2006 06:16:00 PM  
Blogger redaktør said...

Buddy Larsen,

Did they die fighting Communists/Islamists, or were they simply killed by Communists/Islamists? Would a ratio of 2 to 1, either way, satisfy in telling the answer?

11/10/2006 06:35:00 PM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

cedarford wrote:

Sunnis that cheered as Americans burned alive in an IED-hit Amtrack now seeing Shiite death squads armed with hacksaws and power drills moving into their USA-vacated neighborhoods.

Wow, the hacksaws got to be quite a shock to guys who call not getting their customary orange juice while in US custody "torture".

11/10/2006 07:32:00 PM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

nahncee said:

... the reality most likely will be two years of unending hissing deadlock.

Excellent, that means they can't mess anything up.

Other than cut off funding for this and that, and voters get very cranky when their government is shut down.

That's even better. When Gingrich threw his fit and shut down the government, that was the first nail in the coffin of the 1994 revolution, and the beginning of Clinton's return to "relevance". This stuff works both ways.

11/10/2006 07:36:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

tckurd said...
Cedarford, I so loathe you entirely, with your revisionist gassing:

http://icasualties.org/oif_a/CasualtyTrends.htm


You have to be an utter idiot to think American voters will have a change of heart on learning that while both Shia and Sunni Iraqi Arabs hate Americans and wish them dead - that Americans must stay and bleed because otherwise the Arabs take to readily killing one another instead. As evidenced by your otherwise impressive daily Arab-on-Arab murder list.

Better they kill & mutilate one another than give them our guys as a target. Frankly, the more the merrier...if both sides are nothing but animals at heart...Slay away, true believers!
********************
Every day after we leave Iraq the odds increase on an Islamist takeover

If 80% of Arab Muslims loath and hate US occupation - all we do by being there is provide modernizers and Islamists alike with a mutual target they can agree upon. And all we accomplish is forestalling the choice that 80% wishes to avoid - taking charge of their own fate and choosing between modernity and Fundi Islamic life.

If we can't civilize them, we should just keep it at "OK, have your civil war. We tried and failed to assist you in creating a modern nation. We are leaving. And won't be back unless you fuck with us. But if you do, we will destroy all the air or naval assets, and Army we can find, all your electric plants, bridges, factories of value...and let you try and rebuild it."

Every 12-15 years we have to go down and clean up Haiti, since those people have never been fit to run a modern nation either.

11/10/2006 07:54:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmo said...

Habu1 11/10/2006 04:30:27 PM

Amen, noble warrior, with gratitude, amen.

11/10/2006 08:08:00 PM  
Blogger Mike H. said...

Habu1, domo arigato.

11/10/2006 09:58:00 PM  
Blogger Bret said...

wretchard wrote: "Never did conservatives seriously entertain the idea of prosecuting liberals after an electoral defeat but liberals would."

Never? None of them? Wasn't Clinton impeached, for example? Seems like at least someone was thinking about prosecuting at least one liberal.

I do wonder though if we're evolving toward a rather different form of government where the president and vice-president are automatically impeached and removed from office if they are not from the same party as the house and senate. It would more resemble a parlimentary government. Of course, the losing presidents would be hung...

11/10/2006 10:31:00 PM  
Blogger Cutler said...

"It was discredited by the lack of other dominoes (Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, Taiwan) falling to Communism when the Vietnam domino fell. Indeed, there was a reverse domino effect that started in 1989 with the fall of the Berlin Wall."

As your own paragrah says, there is nothing implicity wrong with domino theory, aka bandwagoning. It just that it depends on the context.

Moreover, Laos and Cambodia did go with Vietnam.

11/11/2006 12:57:00 AM  
Blogger Cutler said...

Ah, other people already said it.

It was also pretty telling to me that two countries were just left off the list.

Nevermind the extra 10 years Thailand got to prepare.

11/11/2006 01:04:00 AM  
Blogger 3Case said...

"...can you really say that you understand the Iraqi people based on the tibits the MSM has fed you? Take a deep breath, exhale, relax...."

Further, if you dig around at leftie chatchka stores you may find an old sticker that reads "Your television is lying to you." If you do, be sure it is on the bottom o fht e screen of your tv while watching ANYTHING except Orange County Choppers and WWE.

11/11/2006 05:57:00 AM  
Blogger 3Case said...

BTW, your tv forgot to tell you about THIS...didn't it? It gave you amonth of false Koran in the toi-toi stories, though, didn't it?

11/11/2006 06:43:00 AM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

Brit Hume did mention it, 3case.

11/11/2006 08:03:00 AM  
Blogger Lorenzo said...

About Vietnam and Iraq.

Refresh my memory, who won the Cold War again?

The biggest problem with Iraq is it does not appear to be working and the current Administration convinces very few that it has a clue about how to create a successful outcome.

The outcome in Vietnam from abandonment was simple and clear--Communist takeover. The outcome in Iraq will be what? Partition, chaos, Shi'a domination, a local deal worked out? Outcomes from either staying or leaving are nowhere near as clear as David Warren and others are suggesting.

11/11/2006 11:47:00 AM  
Blogger Pascal Fervor said...

I suggested Friday that folks who are fed up with Hobson's Choices start deliberating with those similarly aware. Effective collaboration will begin with thinking outside the box.

11/11/2006 02:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Problem is, when / if we leave, the Iranians will come, either directly or through their co-religionist proxies.

11/12/2006 01:53:00 AM  
Blogger Jim said...

It's strange but many of my generation, especially those who avoided serving in Vietnam by finding a less risky path, are now rabid hawks. Perhaps they were trying to expiate secret guilt feelings when they orchestated the invasion of Iraq? Anyway, these are the folks who didn't actually take a stand and either oppose or actively support the war in Vietnam, but just avoided going there themselves. Many of us who actually fought that stupid war seem to be much less enthusiastic about this one. More than a few in the Administration(read all) missed the seminal event of their lifetimes, and are now ensuring that the youth of today have the opportunity to experience what they missed.
Unlike Vietnam however, a failure in this war will have far reaching ramifications for the US. After Vietnam fell to the Communists... nothing happened. It was a strategic backwater. The Gulf however, is the wellhead of our life-blood: Oil.
Don’t you just love it? Our President now says, 'some mistakes were made' (not, ‘I screwed from the get-go’).
A mistake is taking one pair of socks on a two day business trip. You can recover from that.
Charging off a cliff with your drawers hiked up over your eyes while shouting to the world, “watch this!” doesn’t qualify as a mistake. There’s no ‘do-over’s’ in a war.

11/13/2006 08:56:00 AM  
Blogger Griswel said...

"Never did conservatives seriously entertain the idea of prosecuting liberals after an electoral defeat but liberals would."

But we do learn.

Gaius Marius and his followers, in a fever, executed a hundred or so, after which Sulla systematically annihilated his opponents - killing thousands.

Which do you think sounds like the conservative approach?

11/13/2006 10:53:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Powered by Blogger