49 Comments

1. Robert Crawford:

“Destroy our way of life”? It would seem this puny foe would have little chance of that.

They certainly seem to be doing a good job of it in Europe, mainly by threatening (and committing) violence if they aren’t catered to.

Their most powerful weapon is the willingness of so many people to go along with their demands, whether it’s out of agreement, cowardice, or enemy-of-my-enemy.

Dec 1, 2005 - 8:58 am 2. beautifulatrocities:

It’s time for the warring parties (pun intended) within our society to start talking to each other to examine what’s really happening. This is not about job search for politicians anymore.

Hard to see this happening. The decadent passivist Left in England flourished right up to the outbreak of WWII, railing for political purposes that the Tories were the greatest villains on the planet. It made no sense for them, as it doesn’t for the Dems, to admit the gravity of a common enemy, because that risks uniting society, precisely the thing an out-of-power party doesn’t want.

Dec 1, 2005 - 9:20 am 3. Old Dad:

Roger,

The debates that matter most are the ‘06 elections.

Dec 1, 2005 - 9:29 am 4. OJ:

The ‘fighting’ you see today is nothing more than political posturing by the left. The President is clearly vulnerable on Iraq right now, although nothing in reality has changed. Someone needs to expose these hacks for what they are… opportunists. Are these the people we want in Washington? Politicians that change their opinion depending on what is presenting the best chance to get more power?

http://www.rightviews.com/article.php?id=331

Dec 1, 2005 - 10:00 am 5. Ron Wrght:

Roger,

I would invite your readers to this post by Dan Darling and the comment thread over at Winds of Change re the goal of radical Islamofascisim:

Ahmadinejad’s UN halo

He’s a real budding Hitler megalomaniac. I hope we can rain on his parade before it’s too late.

[...]

Calling a ’shovel a shovel’

OK folks can we call a “shovel a shovel” without digressing into the realm of the mystics?

The GWOT should be called the Global War Against Islamofascism. The Jihadists ultimately seek the subjugation of the entire non-Islamic world and impose Islamic rule. Not very friendly and not over my dead body.

The ideology of Islamofascism is no different than all the other failed ideology down through history that don’t recognize the free will of men and women e.g., Communism, Nazism, Maoism and Fascisim.

A key concept of radical Islamofascism is that man is evil and must be controlled by a higher authority. The problem lies that this control is vested in human beings subject to the same human frailities as we all are. Those who gain control in this manner eventually become corrupt and despotic.

Whether you believe in a supreme being, force, cause, tea leaves or whatever or not, our founding fathers had it right when they recognized this universal truth in the Preamble of the US Constitution.

[...]

Read More

Here

Dec 1, 2005 - 10:07 am 6. Terrye:

Roger:

I agree with you. Even the America Firsters stopped complaining once the shooting started in earnest.

Not these guys. Like Imus says: Iraq is a mess [period]. For sneering people like him the talk of battling terrorissm is just political hype and they could care less what happens in the Middle East just so long as they are not inconvenienced.

Try to talk to them about the war in Iraq in a rational grownup way and all you get is eyeball rolling and a smirk.

So I guess at least some of the folks have just opted out of the whole discussion. They are too busy being cynical and paranoid to bother with some war they don’t believe exists anyway. Hell no their enemy is the other half of the population of the United States.

Dec 1, 2005 - 11:08 am 7. Jamison1:

Murtha says Army ‘broken, worn out’

The U.S. Army is “broken, worn out” and “living hand-to-mouth” from fighting in Iraq and may not be able to meet future military threats to this country’s security, U.S. Rep. John Murtha said Wednesday.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/regional/s_399643.html

Dec 1, 2005 - 11:50 am 8. Don Miguel:

One Iranian nuclear bomb exploded in the atmosphere above the U.S. could send half of the country back to the 19th century. Yes, they could destroy our way of life.

Dec 1, 2005 - 12:08 pm 9. Yehudit:

Murtha is such a manipulative tool. That’s certainly not what the troops say, but he presumes to speak for them in this patronizing way.

Dec 1, 2005 - 12:19 pm 10. beautifulatrocities:

I wonder what plans the Pentagon has in the event of a dirty bomb or nuke going off in an American city. Ghost of a Flea said even if this happened, the Angry Left would say, It’s Bush’s fault, Blowback, Hiroshima, etc. (Which means they’re irrelevant.) I would hope that the following day, N Korea & Iran would be flattened, & Pak’s nukes either seized or that country similarly incapacitated. Because the old rules will no longer apply.

(Imagine Gore dealing with something like that! OMFG)

Dec 1, 2005 - 12:24 pm 11. monkyboy:

That’s just kind of creepy.

We’ve got politicians who were afraid to fight in Vietnam overseeing Generals who are determined to re-fight it and win this time.

Or is Perfect Peter just angling for a $4 million book deal like Tommy “No Plan” Franks got?

Every time I see our Marines riding around in lightly-armored open-top amphibious vehicles near the Syrian border, I know nobody running this “war” gives a crap about our troops.

Dec 1, 2005 - 12:49 pm 12. Ed Poinsett:

They don’t have to bring nukes here to destroy our way of life. All they need to do is nuke the Saudi oil terminals, the Venezuelan oil terminals, and a few more and the world economy will collapse. If it collapses, so does ours.

Dec 1, 2005 - 12:49 pm 13. RogerA:

Ok–we have monkeyboy’s and Jamison’s comments. Where to begin–Murtha’s service is, of course, admirable–we all have to say that to kiss his big ass–but the reality is, his service is in the USMC RESERVE–OK–he did some viet nam time–so did a whole lot of other people, me included. That should have taught him a lesson, but he apparently failed to learn it–the lesson is simple: when you cut and run, MILLIONS of people die or are sent to reeducation camps.

As for Jamison’s comments which are barely worth responding to: you dont design vehicles with armor for ANY contingency–you design them for the missions that are normally assigned–ANY vehice, up to and including tanks, can be taken out by something as elementary as an RPG (stands for rocket propelled grenade)–

You speak as one who thinks no one cares about our troops–wrong–I have never seen a case where our policy makers dont care about our troops–

Our troops are just pawns in the left’s mindless ignorant rants–the troops are the useful idiots–but let me assure you, there isnt a man or woman in the chain of command that doesnt care about our troops–so give me a friggin break–you are an idiot.

Dec 1, 2005 - 1:17 pm 14. RogerA:

Gee–I had such a wonderful catharsis, but I missed my targets: reverse jamison and monkeyboy–they, however, still remain idiots.

Dec 1, 2005 - 1:20 pm 15. In Vino Veritas:

I would hope that the following day, N Korea & Iran would be flattened

I would say that you are hoping for such an attack on American soil so that your eliminationist fantasies can come true. It’s amazing how bloodlust is just as clear in print as it is in speech.

Dec 1, 2005 - 1:33 pm 16. Terrye:

Our military is a lot bigger than the 150,000 servicemen and women in Iraq. Saying it is broken is just stupid not to mention irresponsible in a time of war. What is next from these guys? A Come and Get It neon sign on the Statue of Liberty?

In fact we have managed to keep at least 37,000 people in Korea every damn year for the last 50+ years and if Murtha and the rest of the Democrats were all that worried about the US having enough men in uniform maybe they should have thought about that before the military cuts of the 90’s. The good old peace dividend.

And these troops are better armed, fed and clothed than any military in history.

This myth of no armour is just that. Those transprots have been upgraded for the field and the military has always had to be flexible and resourceful when it comes to responding to different situations.

Dec 1, 2005 - 1:46 pm 17. Terrye:

Our military is a lot bigger than the 150,000 servicemen and women in Iraq. Saying it is broken is just stupid not to mention irresponsible in a time of war. What is next from these guys? A Come and Get It neon sign on the Statue of Liberty?

In fact we have managed to keep at least 37,000 people in Korea every damn year for the last 50+ years and if Murtha and the rest of the Democrats were all that worried about the US having enough men in uniform maybe they should have thought about that before the military cuts of the 90’s. The good old peace dividend.

And these troops are better armed, fed and clothed than any military in history.

This myth of no armour is just that. Those transprots have been upgraded for the field and the military has always had to be flexible and resourceful when it comes to responding to different situations.

Dec 1, 2005 - 1:47 pm 18. RosOz:

Ammar Abdulhamid October link.

“While neocons and liberals, or however one categorizes one at this stage, argue over wagging dogs and other fine assortments of beasts and monsters, and while the debate over the merits of real politick vs. salvation politics rages on, there are parts of the world that are going to hell in a hand-basket, reflecting the new cold war climate created by this internal debate. It looks as if America is having a nice cold civil war by proxy over its own identity and future.”

Amongst the players here we have Our Public Broadcaster, tirelessly assiduous in finding opportunities to pronounce Iraq a lost cause and your President and our PM the most venal and evil of men. Our Public Broadcaster is probably a misnomer; their policy is to never use “our” about any Australian event or institutions or persons. They are not of us but rather belong with and to some greater international mob.

Of that international mob, so many important stories they could report. But no, they all arrive at the same one with the same understanding of it. And so often they fly with the lie and never express regret when the falsity or distortion or misinformation is no longer deniable. Rather on to the next one.

The military has not done a good enough communications job? Their core business is about defending their citizens, and to win the PR business I think is simply not a possibility for them in the current environment. Perhaps your pollies such as Murtha could get this and stop betraying them.

Have just listened to a report about US military getting into paid editorials. Google, over 370 sites so far. So the US military is fighting the ideas war, like the left here claim the fight should be about. The military say they are trying to combat the seemingly untouchable media managers of the murder-incorporated set. Silly sods, with our media on the side of those obscenities. I don?t think so.

So this is the story of the moment, presented in most cases that I have looked at as another aspect of US venality and dishonesty. Yet does the media question it’s manipulation by the murderers. Not here I can assure you. And why is this such an important story (and shocking) of all the stories!

So maybe we all need to start listening as well as talking, but what to do about an “international” media who seems unable to stop seeing us as venal and stupid citizens of the west. Gorged on its moral greed and vanity, it condemns us, our values and our leaders. But while it remains the gatekeeper, dismissive of the idea that they seek to destroy “our” way of life, how can the conversation be held.

Dec 1, 2005 - 1:49 pm 19. dougf:

I would say that you are hoping for such an attack on American soil so that your eliminationist fantasies can come true.–IVV

Ahhhhhh— Eliminationist Fantasies !! —-VRWC Simpson.

Dec 1, 2005 - 2:02 pm 20. monkyboy:

RogerA,

If, when we pull our troops out of Iraq, we leave behind a functioning democracy, then I will admit to being an idiot.

If instead, Iraq becomes a civil-war torn puppet state of Iran when we leave, will you?

Dec 1, 2005 - 2:06 pm 21. beautifulatrocities:

Note to In Vito Whatsit: see Projection

Dec 1, 2005 - 2:14 pm 22. beautifulatrocities:

See also Moral Preening

Dec 1, 2005 - 2:15 pm 23. couleejew:

You started a new media entity, time to start a new political party.

Dec 1, 2005 - 2:16 pm 24. beautifulatrocities:

Also useful for In Vito etc: Poisoning the Well.

Practice your rhetorical skills & get back to me

Dec 1, 2005 - 2:20 pm 25. RogerA:

Monkeyboy–You, sir, are on. I will be the first to admit that the President’s strategy, at least as I see it is totally wrong–

Lets both us admit that at this point neither knows the outcome–you and I can marshall all the current talking points we want; we can cite historical precedent; we can cite polls–but I will be the first to tell you that I havent got the remotest idea if the President’s strategy will work–and neither, sir do you–

If cleaning out the swamp of Jihadism works, then I believe the whole world will be a lot better off. What, sir, do you believe in?

Dec 1, 2005 - 2:40 pm 26. monkyboy:

RogerA,

I believe Radical Islam has been rising and falling in the Middle East for over 1000 years.

I believe the surest way to defeat it is let people see what it’s like to live under it. The Mullahs of Iran are the best example…they will eventually be overthrown.

I think our presence in Iraq is only prolonging this current wave of Radical Islam. The sooner we get out of the Middle East, the sooner Radical Islam will fade.

Dec 1, 2005 - 3:16 pm 27. Don Miguel:

Isn’t “Radical Islam” redundant? After all, jihadists use the texts of the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira to justify their actions while members of the “moderate” side of Islam are not exactly rushing to denounce the them.

Dec 1, 2005 - 3:30 pm 28. Paul:

Wow.

“I believe the surest way to defeat it is let people see what it’s like to live under it.”

Insert the totalitarian-fascist ideology of your choice into this sentence.

Who cares how many millions die? Eventually they will rise up and overthrow those with the boots on their necks.

Oh really? That’s how totalitarian states fall? Haven’t read much history I take it?

And even if it was true, we should let the Islamofascists get nuclear weapons and trust that they won’t use them while we are waiting for them to be overthrown by their own people?

Reason number 467,982 why the Dems must never be allowed to control the destiny of America until they have expunged all traces of the postmodern leftist cancer from their party.

Dec 1, 2005 - 3:54 pm 29. Paul:

Wow.

“I believe the surest way to defeat it is let people see what it’s like to live under it.”

Insert the totalitarian-fascist ideology of your choice into this sentence.

Who cares how many millions die? Eventually they will rise up and overthrow those with the boots on their necks.

Oh really? That’s how totalitarian states fall? Haven’t read much history I take it?

And even if it was true, we should let the Islamofascists get nuclear weapons and trust that they won’t use them while we are waiting for them to be overthrown by their own people?

Reason number 467,982 why the Dems must never be allowed to control the destiny of America until they have expunged all traces of the postmodern leftist cancer from their party.

Dec 1, 2005 - 4:07 pm 30. monkyboy:

I hate to disappoint you, Paul, but I’m a registered Republican and my vote for John Kerry was my first vote for a Democrat in 25 years of voting.

Please cite our recent(post WWII) victories against totalitarian states achieved by violence.

I see Russia and China liberalizing without a shot being fired. I see Vietnam and Iraq as totalitarian triumphs brought about by American hubris.

Dec 1, 2005 - 4:19 pm 31. Pixy Misa:

I see Vietnam and Iraq as totalitarian triumphs brought about by American hubris.

Vietnam is a totalitarian triumph brought about by lack of American hubris. Just a bit more hubris and the South Vietnam at least would have remained intact.

As for Iraq – it’s rather an ex-totalitarian triumph at the moment, wouldn’t you say?

The Soviet Union we faced down with nuclear weapons for decades before it collapsed from within. China is liberalising economically, but far less so socially.

Please cite our recent(post WWII) victories against totalitarian states achieved by violence.

Shooting wars? We haven’t been in that many shooting wars. Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq. Vietnam of course we won militarily and then abandoned.

How about sustained credible threat of violence? Then I could name a dozen easy. Russia, Poland, Ukraine, Romania, Hungary, Czech and Slovak Republics, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Slovenia, Moldova, sundry ’stans.

If you get to place your cutoff at exactly the end of the last really big shooting war, then I get to redefine the terms of the question.

Dec 1, 2005 - 4:40 pm 32. PeterUK:

“I see Russia and China liberalizing without a shot being fired. I see Vietnam and Iraq as totalitarian triumphs brought about by American hubris.”

Early days to make that decision,and this,”I believe the surest way to defeat it is let people see what it’s like to live under it”,is ludicrous.

It was a close run thing with the Soviet Union,Stalin was contemplating nuclear war,the Cuban crisis was on the edge, the tanks were going to roll Westwards on several occasions,what brought down the USSR was economic collapse.

Make no mistake if there had not been a credible military deterrent and a willingness to use it the USSR would have rolled up Europe.As it was Vietnam was a proxy war with the USSR as was Korea.

Dec 1, 2005 - 4:42 pm 33. Syl:

I believe Radical Islam has been rising and falling in the Middle East for over 1000 years.

This may be true, but it doesn’t take into account how many more people the world has today (both as victims and perpetrators), nor how much more lethal their potential weapons are, nor how the ideology is more easily spread because of new technology and ease of travel.

I believe the surest way to defeat it is let people see what it’s like to live under it.

The problem here is that once they are living under it, it is nearly impossible to become free of it. The various towns in Western Iraq that were held hostage by foreign terrorists could not even be helped by tribal militias who ended up calling on the Americans and Iraqi forces to free them. The more totalitarian the regime, the harder it is to be overthrown from within.

The Mullahs of Iran are the best example…they will eventually be overthrown.

Eventually may not be good enough. There are no signs it will be anytime soon. We can only watch events play out.

I think our presence in Iraq is only prolonging this current wave of Radical Islam.

I don’t think if we had NOT gone into Iraq, the wave would have died out. The territories the radicals were fighting in and for are not different now than they were before with the exception of Iraq. (Though even in Iraq there had already been radical activity against Kurdish areas for many years.)

The sooner we get out of the Middle East, the sooner Radical Islam will fade.

Our leaving the Middle East will have no effect on radical Islam in Europe, in southeast Asia, in the balkans, or anywhere else. The disease had already spread far outside the Middle East in its attempts at expansion long before we entered Iraq.

Dec 1, 2005 - 4:54 pm 34. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

A bit more historical fantasies.

South Korea was liberated by violence.

Vietnam was liberated by violence, and then lost to the sorts of policies you prescribe: getting out and letting everyone look at it while the other side decided to swarm over the border and use violence to win. They are still seated there in one of the few remaining communist totalitarian states left.

China is hardly liberated. Perhaps in the sense that 1933-1938 Germany was liberated, you are right. Is that really what you want?

The USSR was defeated by a combination of excellent psychological warfare, the threat of violence (via the Pershing missiles and SDI) and the actual violence of Afghanistan, all pushing its creaking mobocracy past the tipping point.

Cambodia was “liberated” from its butchers by less vicious butchers, the Vietnamese, by invasion.

The Islamofascist state of Afghanistan was liberated by the violence of its people directed by our special forces and aided by our vast and violent air power.

The insane fascist state of Iraq has been partially liberated by our violence. Ask the Iraqis and most feel liberated, even as they worry about the violence.

On the other hand, when we showed weakness, the powers of fascism expanded their influence and their violence. After our shameful withdrawal from ‘Nam, how many countries fell to communist revolutions? How many more were on the edge when Reagan took over and changed the game? When we showed weakness to Islamofascist attacks on our people (Lebanon Marine Barracks – Reagan, World Trade Center – Clinton, Khobar Towers – Clinton, Moghadishu – Clinton, etc), did it prevent our add to the likelihood of 9-11?

And even if your history was correct (unlikely if you bought John Kerry’s stories – some of us Vietnam Veterans who fought Kerry’s lies last year in the national political sphere have different information), the current situation is unprecedented. For the first time, relatively weak rogue states (Iran, North Korea) have the ability to do extreme damage to us through the use of nuclear or biological WMD. For the first time, stateless terrorists with no obvious return address (making a problem for deterrence) have a real chance of acquiring major weapons of mass destruction – probably nuclear explosives – and using them on our soil.

You may be willing to sit back and wait 70 years for the Islamofascist regimes to implode. I don’t think we have that long – they, through their untraceable proxies – are going to wreck us using WMDs, and by overwhelming some of our feckless allies with Islamic immigration and subsequent anti-democratic demands. (i.e. France and other Europoean counties).

So tell us, what is your policy, monkeyboy? What do you predict its outcome will be in the middle east in the next 2 years? In the world in the next ten? Shall we pull out of Iraq? What will be the result? Shall we let Iran get nukes? If not, how will you stop them?

If a nuclear weapon explodes in space above the US, taking out most of our electrical and electronic systems, what do you do about it? If a nuke or serious dirty bomb goes off in downtown Manhattan, what is your advice? Do you think showing our weakness by pulling out will help prevent those events?

As another Republican, I say we need to stay the course, whether we believe the original war was correct or not. We need to understand that cutting and running would show, once again, that we are weak. We need to understand that pulling out will condemn to brutal civil war, ending in bondage, millions of Iraqis for whom we have taken responsiblity, and will create some sort of state which will be a terrorists’ paradise.

Care to dispute that?

Dec 1, 2005 - 4:58 pm 35. RogerA:

Monkeyboy–you see? all I did was tell you I was prepared to take your bet–and all these good people chimed in to tell you how full of it you were–

I will stand prepared to take your bet, but you remain, along with the American Left, the useful idiots about which Lenin talks about.

Dec 1, 2005 - 5:28 pm 36. Paul:

Pixy Mixa, Peter UK, Syl, John Moore:

Excellent posts.

Monkeyboy:

“I’m a Republican who voted for Kerry.”

I call bullshit.

Only liberal Democrats are foolish enough to believe that totalitarianism is ever defeated without military force or the threat of military force coupled with economic pressures. Republicans, and sensible Democrats (presently on the endangered species list), know better.

Besides only juvenile minded lefties post under handles like “Monkeyboy”.

Dec 1, 2005 - 5:34 pm 37. PeterUK:

“only juvenile minded lefties post under handles like “Monkeyboy”.

I mean to say… voting Republican for twenty five years,theN suddenly on the road to Damascus a blinding flash of light and you vote for JOHN F,KERRY ?! Lieutenant Gookslayer ,you a fan of Apocalypse Now?

Dec 1, 2005 - 6:10 pm 38. monkyboy:

Not such a big leap really, Peter.

I’m a fiscal conservative and a social liberal.

Bill Clinton did far better restraining the growth of governemnt than the Republicans have since they took over.

On the social side, the Republicans have thrown in with our own religious fanatics. Not a big fan of religious police telling people what they can do in their own homes…

Dec 1, 2005 - 8:01 pm 39. Buddy Larsen:

I agree. Just tonight, some guys dressed in sheets with big red crosses on ‘em broke into my house just as we were sitting down to dinner, and made us chant “Thank You Jesus for our daily bread” 100 times. They’re out in the yard right now burning a cross, and when I called the police, the dispatcher said they were already over at my house burning a cross out in the yard! And this is happening all over the nation, people!

I’m 108 years old and have been a Nazi all my life, but this time I’m just going to have to vote for Joe Stalin. Why? Because this nation has totally sucked ever since it stupidly invaded the wrong country–France!!!–in 1944, when everybody knows the Gestapo was juuuust about to–aaaany minute–start being nicely-nicely to whatever Jews might not’ve yet died of natural causes in those snobbish resort camps they built behind all that barbed wire they put up just to keep the rest of us out.

So, I’m with you, monkeyboy. You and me–we got it figgered out!

Dec 1, 2005 - 10:04 pm 40. Syl:

monkyboy

On the social side, the Republicans have thrown in with our own religious fanatics. Not a big fan of religious police telling people what they can do in their own homes

Hey, I’m not either. But that’s a strawman. Argue reality, not fantasy.

I don’t like being told what I can talk about and what words I can use. Political Correctness didn’t start with Repubs you know. And it affects free speech, one of our most precious rights.

One side complains about TV shows I shouldn’t watch, the other about foods I shouldn’t eat.

The upshot is to fight them both and decide who you want to govern for other reasons.

Dec 1, 2005 - 10:09 pm 41. Buddy Larsen:

It’s not even a straw-man, Syl. It’s an invisible man. Find me someone–anyone, anywhere–who can’t now do in their own home something they could do in their own home under Clinton.

Murder, rape, assault, molesting kids, things of that nature, are doubtless a little less acceptable now than then, but, hey, how many of us want to DO that sort of thing in our own homes, anyway?

One thing we can’t do now in our own homes that we could do under Clinton, is watch our children absorb the details of oral sex, date-rape, male chauvinism, influence-peddling, abuse-of-power, and general contempt for the nation and its people and its institutions, that flooded 24/7 x 8 years from the White House through all the media channels and into the home (during which time Congress was forcing the reforms that ‘made’ whatever WAS ‘made’ of that presidency).

Dec 1, 2005 - 10:39 pm 42. Charlie (Colorado):

Please cite our recent(post WWII) victories against totalitarian states achieved by violence.

But please don’t try to include WWII because that wil screw up everything.

Oh, and don’t mention the differences between North and South Korea.

And don’t include the ongoing low-grade warfare from about 20 minutes after the armistice was signed (my father flew missions against the Russians shortly after the Japanese surrender, a bit of history not often mentioned) until cost and attrition caused the USSR to collapse. (Oh, that’s not the result of violence? Well, then, the Napoleanic Wars weren’t won by violence either. In both cases, your argument might be heard politely, but then laughed off.)

Dec 1, 2005 - 11:14 pm 43. PeterUK:

1)”I hate to disappoint you, Paul, but I’m a registered Republican and my vote for John Kerry was my first vote for a Democrat in 25 years of voting.”

2)”I’m a fiscal conservative and a social liberal.

Bill Clinton did far better restraining the growth of governemnt than the Republicans have since they took over.”

So why didn’t you vote for Clinton? Were you putting your second principle into action?

3)”On the social side, the Republicans have thrown in with our own religious fanatics. Not a big fan of religious police telling people what they can do in their own homes…”

4)”I believe the surest way to defeat it is let people see what it’s like to live under it. The Mullahs of Iran are the best example…they will eventually be overthrown.”

Points 1 and 2 are contradictory as are 3 and 4

It is all right for the Iranians to live under religious fanatics but not Monkeyboy.

Dec 2, 2005 - 2:41 am 44. Terrye:

I think monkey boy has a problem with chronology, more Americans died as a result of terrorism before the invasion of Iraq than after.

I call bullshit as well…I do not beleive any self respecting lifelong Republican would vote for Kerry because the liberal Democrat from MA is fiscal conservative. puhleaze…

I am a social liberal too and I think that if some poor bastard wants to say Merry Christmas he should damn well be able to do it.

And if what monkey boy says is true, why did we fight in WW2? After all sooner or later Tojo and Hilter would have been ovrrthrown by the masses anyway. All we had to say we were really really sorry if we did anything to offend and promise to never ever do any thing to offend again, take what was left of our Navy and slink back to the mainland, tell the Aussies and Brits they were on their own, bid Europe farewell….and let nature takes its course.

you betcha.

Dec 2, 2005 - 3:43 am 45. Buddy Larsen:

HT to Rick Ballard @ YARGB, here’s the great shrink Shrinkwrapped quoting Gagdad Bob (bolding mine):

A mind nourished on lies will still grow, but it will grow in a monstrous way analogous to a tumor. Rather than being a unity, it will be an agglomeration. It will be riven by contradiction, and there will be no true synthesis of its elements. Indeed, this is one of the reasons why it is so difficult to argue with a leftist. Such an individual will freely believe all kinds of mutually contradictory things, such as “our soldiers are engaged in a genocidal war based on lies, and I support the troops,” or “President Bush lied about WMD, and President Clinton was telling the truth about them,” or “we should have prevented North Korea from obtaining nukes, and Saddam was not a threat to obtain them.” At the same time, the leftist will unconsciously “attack” the connecting links in your own psyche, giving you the subjective experience of what it must be like to be them.

Dec 2, 2005 - 6:33 am 46. PeterUK:

“Please cite our recent(post WWII) victories against totalitarian states achieved by violence.”

All right then…make it the last 27 minutes….

Dec 2, 2005 - 7:30 am 47. PeterUK:

Doesn’t sound like a good Republican!

“On the other hand, the last 2 months were the 5th and 6th worst months for U.S. soldier deaths since the “war” began 33 months(almost 3 years) ago…”

Posted by: monkyboy [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 2, 2005 07:48

Completely ignores the recent operations conducted by troops to clear terrorist strongholds.

Dec 2, 2005 - 10:10 am 48. Bostonian:

PeterUK,

Our friend Monkyboy could still indeed be a Republican.

I have noticed that far Right considers Iraqis/Arabs *incapable* of self-government, just as the Left does. (Monkyboy has in fact said almost exactly that on a previous thread.)

For that reason, these people consider the entire mission completely doomed and therefore disregard everything except body count and monetary expense.

Dec 2, 2005 - 11:09 am 49. Buddy Larsen:

Bostonian, I can see that as befitting of a far-right attitude, but, jeez, what a huge, galloping, whopping-big contradiction for the Children of the Corn.

Dec 2, 2005 - 12:15 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: