Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Dennis Prager :: Townhall.com Columnist
New Form of Evil Is Why America Has Not Won Iraq War
by Dennis Prager
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


I never thought we could see a new form of evil. After the gas chambers of the Holocaust, the tens of millions murdered in the Gulag, the forced starvation in the Ukraine, the hideous medical experiments on people by the Germans and the Japanese in World War II, the torture chambers in all police states, I had actually believed that no new forms of evil existed.

I was wrong.

Of course, for sheer cruelty, one cannot outdo the Nazis; no depiction of hell ever matched the reality of Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen. But while Islamists and Baathists in Iraq have not devised new forms of torture -- there probably are no new ways left -- they have devised a new form of evil: murdering, maiming and torturing as many innocents among their own people as possible.

I do not know of an analogous form of evil. When the Allies conquered Nazi Germany, disaffected Nazis did not go around murdering and cutting off the heads of fellow Germans in order to make the Allies leave. Nor did disaffected Japanese blow up Japanese students so as to make the American occupation of Japan untenable.

Here is the latest example of this new form of evil as reported by the Associated Press: "Maj. Gen. Michael Barbero, deputy director for regional operations on the Joint Staff, said . . . the vehicle used in the attack [on Iraqi civilians] was waved through a U.S. military checkpoint because two children were visible in the back seat. He said this was the first reported use of children in a car bombing in Baghdad. 'Children in the back seat lowered suspicion, (so) we let it move through, they parked the vehicle, the adults run out and detonate it with the children in the back,' Barbero told reporters in Washington."

These same "insurgents" routinely blow up children who line up to receive candy from U.S. troops. Likewise, college students are targeted for death, as are men lining up to apply for civilian jobs, men and women attending mosques, physicians in hospitals, and so on. The more innocent the Iraqi, the more likely he or she is to be targeted for murder.

I submit that there was no way to anticipate this. And no one did. This includes all those who predicted a civil war in Iraq between Shiites and Sunnis. I include myself among those who predicted savagery in Iraq. On a number of occasions prior to our invasion of Iraq, I recounted to my radio listeners this chilling story:

As a young man, in 1974, I was riding on a bus traveling from Beirut to Damascus. The man I sat next to was an English-speaking Iraqi whom I asked at one point in our conversation, "Can you describe your nation in a sentence?" "No problem," he immediately answered. "We Iraqis are the most barbaric people in the world."

I obviously never forgot that man's words, and therefore anticipated great cruelties in Iraq. But neither I nor anyone who predicted a civil war had so much as a premonition of this unprecedented mass murder of the men, women and children among one's own people as a military tactic to defeat an external enemy.

It is, therefore, unfair to blame the Bush administration for not anticipating such a determined "insurgency." Without the mass murder of fellow Iraqis, there would hardly be any "insurgency." The combination of suicide terrorists and a theology of death has created an unprecedented form of "resistance" to an occupier: "We will murder as many men, women and children as we can until you leave." Nor is this a matter of Sunnis murdering Shiites and vice versa: college students, women shopping at a Baghdad market and hospital workers all belong to both groups. Truck bombs cannot distinguish among tribes or religious affiliations.

If America had to fight an insurgency directed solely against us and coalition forces -- even including suicide bombers -- we would surely have succeeded. No one, right, left or center, could imagine a group of people so evil, so devoid of the most elementary and universal concepts of morality, that they would target their own people, especially the most vulnerable, for murder.

That is why we have not yet prevailed in Iraq. Even without all the mistakes made by the Bush administration -- and what political or military leadership has not made many errors in prosecuting a war? -- it could not have foreseen this new form of evil we are witnessing in Iraq.

That is why we have not won.

There are respectable arguments to be made against America's initially going into Iraq. But intellectually honest opponents of the war have to acknowledge that no one could anticipate an "insurgency" that included people leaving children in a car and then blowing them up.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dennis Prager is a radio show host, contributing columnist for Townhall.com, and author of 4 books including Happiness Is a Serious Problem: A Human Nature Repair Manual.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Dennis Prager's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Medved thinks Prager is "un-American"
Hey, Dennis, are you aware that Michael Medved called you un-American? It was during his show on Dec 5, when you were his guest. However, he waited until AFTER you hung up to call you un-American. The cowardly character assassination takes place at 29:45 in the following clip: http://www.townhall.com/TalkRadio/Show.aspx?RadioShowID=4&ContentGuid=4e680241-8643-4673-a53a-8c154ff50811

Also check out Medved's 12/5/06 blog at http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/6a3b8b2f-4418-4b9d-b7c2-60402ffeb794 Medved called your efforts "utterly unjustified and illogical," illustrative of "theocratic tendencies," "a silly distraction," and "a terrible, horrendous strategy" that would lend "credence to liberal charges that we're mean and cold-hearted and theocratic."

With friends like Medved . . .

This is an interesting
viewpoint on the situation. This story of blowing up the children in the car while the adults run away is so grotesque. It makes me cringe.

And, to think that the International community keeps harping on the US for our so called "torture" but where are their voices over something as hideous as this?

For more cringing, come to my blog and read "The Diary of Juliet Smith, Chapters I and II.
http://www.peppermintsplace.townhall.com

that is not why we haven't won
The tactics the insurgents use are shocking. But with the proper counter-insurgency strategy in place, the insurgency can be nipped in the bud and such tactics prevented in the first place.

General Shinseki, General Petraeus, other experts on counterinsurgency warfare like the RAND Corporation all agree: Counterinsurgency is a labor-intensive activity. The RAND figures are you need AT LEAST 1 soldier for every 100 civilians; Petraeus' own counterinsurgency manual says you need even more (maybe 1 soldier for every 60 or 70 civilians). Otherwise an effective clear-hold-build strategy is impossible; troops are spread too thinly and insurgents can infiltrate already cleared areas.

We never had anywhere near that number of troops. We had a ratio of 1 soldier for every 200 Iraqi civilians.

And why didn't we send more troops? Because the Bush Administration never expected an insurgency like this would ever occur. As if toppling Saddam and beginning the process of democracy would prove so alluring that even Sunnis would just chip in peacefully and work for the good of a new Iraq. Which was a fantasy.

When the insurgency first started up in mid-2003, Rumsfeld flatly refused to even call it an insurgency; he kept referring to them as "a few dead-enders" (remember?). Valuable time was wasted, and the insurgency became really widespread by the time that Rummy started taking real action about it.

It's as simple as that.

Flashback to Vietnam?
Didn't this also happen in Vietnam? I don't know, I wasn't there, but I've heard lots of stories of the communists' "join-or-die" school of social progress. Also stories of the communists using early adolescents as "soldiers" and young children as decoys. Use the children as these bombers did, to get the Americans to drop their guard, and you get a two-prong payoff: First you infiltrate the American lines with a car bomb filled with children for payoff number one -- the next time, when the Americans get over their skittishness and open fire on the car whether children are in it or not, you get CNN and ABC to broadcast images of bullet-riddled toddlers for payoff number two.

Yes, it happened in Viet Nam
Using children happened in our last big war mistake, Viet Nam. But then I guess Dennis was traveling around the world and would not know about it since he was not in Viet Nam. Guess he could have been a patriot then but .... Interesting, huh!

Evil Incarnate
Yes, I agree with Dennis Prager that this enemy represents a special kind of evil. I read with interest the book by Dinesh D'Souza that attempts to explain the cultural differences between these killers as well as their concept of proportionality that believes we only had the right to kill 3,000 of theirs because they only killed 3,000 of ours. It isn't that D'Souza is defending the Islamic mind, he is merely trying to explain it. Yet, I am left with no sympathy. I am left with no desire to understand. What I see and interpret from my purely western background is that this evil is worse than any I could have possibly imagined. I personally favor the withdrawal of this country's recognition of Islam as a religion, the closure of all things Islamic in this country much as we did the Nazi's during and after World War II and the deportation of all non-citizens of Islamic background. Let them clean up their world before we let them back in ours. I don't much care whether they join the twenty-first century or not. I don't much care whether they like or respect us or not. I only care that they understand that if they attack us again they will risk annihilation much like the Japanese experienced in the fire-bombings that preceded the two atomic bombs.

If that were a poll, it would be one I
could vote on Ron. I agree wholeheartedly.

Penn: Speaking out for child killers.
Stories like the car bomb kiddies and the image of a six year old girl shot through the head because her Pa resisted a terrorist recruitment drive is what makes me cringe whenever I hear attention seeking morons like Sean Penn rail against those who would fight such insane people.

Sean likes to play a tough guy in the movies, and he likes to fight when he has bodyguards ready to step in before he gets his @ss kicked into the gutter, but he eagerly runs to the defense of those that slaughter children in the name of Allah because he thinks that if he ingratiates himself to these vermin, they may show mercy on him when they strike again. He is the ultimate coward, for he cheers on the type of peope that shot that little girl while wiping his backside with the American flag.

It is a trite saying, but I genuinely would like to know: if such people truly hate our nation so much, why on earth do they live here? Pack your trash Sean, and go find a mud hut in Mahmudiyah. The terrorist will welcome you, I'm sure. But don't bother packing a hat, you won't have a need for one.


During Vietnam
the common thing for the news was to blame our soldiers for "baby killing". This was a lie. I'm sure that it happened at times with collateral damage, but my brother served in VN and he said the women and children carried grenades so you never knew who was going to hit you.

I don't recall Vietnamese deliberately blowing up their own children to kill soldiers though.

Incompetence...
is why we have not won the war in Iraq.

at least two precedents
During the Iran-Iraq War of 1980, Iranians sent children as cannon fodder marching through battlefields.

The Palestinians have taught their young children to glorify being "shaheeds" (martyrs) and die for the cause. The kids are taught this on TV, and even by their own parents. Palestinian moms have actually said they HOPE more of their kids will become shaheeds soon.

So Dennis is incorrect. The Islamist mentality has used children as weapons before. At least twice.

We just didn't notice.

Doesn't matter anyway though.

As I pointed out in my previous post, with a ratio of only 1 U.S. soldier to 200 Iraqi civilians, the insurgency cannot be defeated militarily even they didn't use children as weapons. Just too few troops trying to patrol too many neighborhoods.

Iraq did not attack us
Ron writes: "I don't much care whether they like or respect us or not. I only care that they understand that if they attack us again they will risk annihilation much like the Japanese experienced in the fire-bombings that preceded the two atomic bombs."

Agreed, but would it have made any sense to atom-bomb Baghdad and Fallujah in reprisal for 9-11?

The 9-11 attack came from al-Qaeda which (at the time) was based in Afghanistan.

AFAIK, not a single anti-Western terrorist plot that has been detected since 9-11 has been traced to terrorists from Iraq. They've been traced to terrorists from Pakistan and Iran and also home-grown terrorists in various countries.

You and I could have saved America the entire cost (in blood and treasure) of this Iraq War.

New twist on old evil
The left's favorite poster boy, Che Guevara, used much the same strategy. He and his murderers would kill, rape and burn villages, to show the people that the government could not protect them. Violence was not the result of govt repression of the revolutionary spirit; violence was the CAUSE of revolutionary spirit. Che is quite popular all through the ME, as well as college campuses.

The Iraq violence is similar: kill the innocent in hopes they will blame the authorities instead of the outlaws.

Much as it pains me to see a notorious murderer on t-shirts at the mall, at least one Marxist is doing good for some capitalists.

Prager's right- and wrong
He's right, largely, about why we haven't, and probably cannot, "win". But he's wrong that no one foresaw this. Lots of smart folks did. One of them is now a Senator from Virginia.

It's why I was against the war even when I believed (erroneously) that Saddam had WMD.

But all these people were condemned as antiwar kooks, even the ones with long military backgrounds. Still are. On this website they're tagged as being "for defeat".

Which is why it is virtually impossible for us to have a reasonable conversation on Iraq. It's hard to talk with folks who think you're an anti-American traitor.

wow
" that included people leaving children in a car and then blowing them up."

Come on how about lining 8 year old Amish girls up and blowing them away with shotguns? You take one isolated event and blow it out of proportion, demonizing a people who have had their country nearly destroyed and live under constant duress. You pretend the people doing this are foreign fighters - when the truth is their mostly Iraqis who don't know what else to do

And you do this because it's how you make a living. Conservative or liberal any talk show host or commentator who never has a wayward left/right leaning idea is a phony - the real world is always going to be in the middle. Real people may be conservative but believe in welfare or affirmative action. It's impossible to be 100% republican/democrat all the time unless you're letting someone else do your thinking - or worse you make your living by twisting everything to match up to some political ideal. I'm just a normal guy and I knew there would be a gorilla war and so did you and everyone else reading this. That's why they needed to change the term "gorilla" to something new and exotic like insurgency/ Then they could act surprised when it happened (despite the fact it happens in every war)

Quite frankly I have more respect for a man willing to die for his cause, misguided though it may be, then I do for a man who allows himself to become a propaganda tool for a paycheck.

To Loyal Democrat
Your logic is truly representative of America's education system. What ever happened to reason and deduction - you are responding on a purely emotional level and end up with name calling. That just makes you look ignorant.

Our country has killed more little girls then all the terrorists in the world put together. someone mentioned Japan, that was a vengeful attack on a country of women and children. Every able bodied man was in the war at that point. The firebombing was especially cruel and unnessasary.

There are two sides to each argument and both sides have valid points - what our country hungers for is a man who can find the middle - not for any political gain or to earn the tag centrist but just because that's where the truth is.

Apocalypse Now
I've posted this quote from Apocalypse Now before. This was written when, 1976 or something like that. I don't know if it is based on a real incident but I would not be surprised if it was. When you are fighting a conventional fight against people who do not care if they live or die, people who are able to switch off all human decency in the name of the cause, you are on a hiding to nothin;, at least, in my opinion. I don't know if Prager has seen the movie; maybe it's not his bag seeing as it stars uber-liberal Martin Sheen (who also happens to be passionately anti-abortion, but that's another story). Maybe he should; it might give him some food for thought.

"I remember when I was with Special Forces. Seems a thousand centuries ago. We went into a camp to inoculate the children. We left the camp after we had inoculated the children for Polio, and this old man came running after us and he was crying. He couldn't see. We went back there and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. A pile of little arms. And I remember... I... I... I cried. I wept like some grandmother. I wanted to tear my teeth out. I didn't know what I wanted to do. And I want to remember it. I never want to forget it. I never want to forget. And then I realized... like I was shot... like I was shot with a diamond... a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought: My God... the genius of that. The genius. The will to do that. Perfect, genuine, complete, crystalline, pure. And then I realized they were stronger than we. Because they could stand that these were not monsters. These were men... trained cadres. These men who fought with their hearts, who had families, who had children, who were filled with love... but they had the strength... the strength... to do that. If I had ten divisions of those men our troubles here would be over very quickly. You have to have men who are moral... and at the same time who are able to utilize their primordial instincts to kill without feeling... without passion... without judgment... without judgment. Because it's judgment that defeats us."

To Rapid Fire
Do you know the real reason Jews don't put the "o" in God? Because the name is so sacred they won't write it out.

Bush money-loving friends crashed two planes into New York?

I won't even address the other nuttiness you posted, but you need some serious help.

Terrorism in Miami
Some people I know have been intercepting messages, which indicate that "somebody" is planning a big terrorist act, in dowtown Miami, to take place very soon. It is just hearsay, and I hate to be spreading unsubstantiated rummors, but if I lived around Miami I would be careful, anyway, considering the fact that Ahmadinejad of Iran has been telling all Muslims to leave the USA, because he intends to destroy it.

Nothing's changed
Nothing has changed except the technology with which we use/kill children. The animals who commit these barbaric acts will not be prosecuted or called to account for their actions. To the left these animals are heros. In fact, at some future time they may even be nominated for a Nobel peace prize. Today's barbarians, tomorrow's heros. Just take a look at the late Yasser Arafrat.

Oh puhleeze
Who didn't know, after Desert Storm, that the Muslims are so dedicated to dying to go to their god that they will teach their children to become martyrs to do so? We are "civilized" - and they are "barbarians". We can look down our noses and sneer all we want to, but barbarians without conscience, who can tag a religious honorarium onto dying for their cause, will always be more effective and more heinous in war. To say "Bush didn't know" is to say that he is too stupid to be Governor, much less President, to not know what motivates people. To say that the Democrats and Republicans alike in Congress who voted for the war "didn't know" is to say that they were more interested in $$ and petty revenge than in real action against terrorism. And that is what 'civilization' does for us - makes us forget gut motivations and rationale, and makes us use superficial emotional responses to the barbarians who want to win without counting the cost.
Even if you've never read "the Art of War", or studied history, surely you've seen movies? Did you truly think that the soft-hearted Conan the Barbarian was the true picture of barbarianism? THAT is the true curse of the public education system; that it has socialized our peoples', even our leaders' minds, to make them think that their interpretative view of the world is the only one that exists. This insipid ignorance will cost us more and more.

One Caveat
"We will murder as many men, women and children as we can until you leave."

With all due respect to Dennis Prager, I would add a major caveat: whether Americans leave or not is not only secondary but misleading. It suggests that the murderers will start acting civilly and courteously again once U.S. troops are out. (This suggests in turn that the liberals and Democrats are right in wanting to pull out all U.S. military personnel as soon as possible.)

I know DP doesn't believe that, but just for the sake of being precise, I would like to point out that the real message of the Ba'athists is as follows:

"We will murder as many men, women and children as we can until we are back in power with nobody — foreign or Iraqi — to check our power, our greed, and our bloodlust."

Get real
We have to play by the rules. They don't. We're identifiable. They aren't. Our guys face beheading if captured. Theirs face wearing a pair of panties. We care if one of our soldiers dies. They don't.

We are not facing an "insurgency", a politically correct term which conveys a certain legitimacy. We're facing Islamic terrorists, many of whom derive from outside Iraq and are supported from outside Iraq.

If America doesn't wake up, this war will be fought on the streets of our cities instead of in Iraq where at least our enemies are up against professional soldiers, however handicapped.




"Has Not Won the War"
I submit that the entire premise of this article is wrong as well as most of the posts by our erstwhile liberal posters. This war was won a long time ago. All the way back to that much maligned aircraft carrier speech. At that time the Iraqi military had been defeated and had evaporated, the Iraqi Government had collapsed and gone into hiding, and there was little or no resistance to the US by any of the Iraqi government. That is the traditional definition of "winning a war" that has been used for a millennia.

It is only through the supreme effort of the Democrap spin machine that we can have the premise put forth that we are losing the “war” and even that would not be accepted “fact” if it were not for the MSM. What has happened is that we won the war in almost no time at all with a US casualty figure that was so low as to be unparalleled in human history. This was after also winning the “war” in Afghanistan in little or no time with extreemly low casualties. In both of these wars the Democraps had predicted “Quagmire, Vietnam, huge casuslties in house to house fighting, and general day to day gloom and doom which never came to pass. This situation was unacceptable to the Deocrap party and it’s lackeys in the MSM, therefore an allout blitz by the Deimwits and the MSM was plotted and instrigated. This was essential lest the Democrap Party causght up in it’s never ended host of lies would cease to exist. Indeed, some pundits were predicting this after the previous elections.

What we have now (and have had since the aircraft carrier speech is “democracy building”. The US has historically NEVER been very good at this. This is contrary to what the libtards will say about Germany and Japan at the end of WWII. Those nations existed and did not require to be “rebuilt” in a civilized manner.

Our bigest problem was that we could not leave with Iran and Syria unhampered in the region while Iraq no longer had a military. What we should have done is paused for reconcentration and elliminated Iran at the same time.

Coolnut
That 25% figure you use for returning Vietnam vets is false. In fact returning Vietnam vets need psychiatric help at a lower rate than men of a similar age in the general population. This lie has been promulgated by those who wish to justify their vilification of the war in Vietnam and the atrocities the the anti-war crowd committed to opposed it.

There is collateral damage in any warfare. American soldiers are remarkable in their desire to avoid the killing of innocents and their willingness to endanger themselves to avoid this collateral damage. If you believe otherwise it is you who are in need of psychiatric help.

mike_lee
Actually, the incident with the children did happen. At the direct orders of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini himself.

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20060424&s=kuntzel042406

During World War Two, it was a common tactic to "borrow" a flock of sheep from a local farmer to clear a minefield of AP mines.

I guess the Iranians were short of sheep.

cheers

eon

winning a war
to Vic:

Exactly! We won the war long ago! What we aren't winning is attempt at democracy, which may never happen. Democracy doesn't support tribal existence, check out our own Indians. Arab social structure is far removed from what we think they should be. Arabs learned alot from our encounter in Vietnam. They know we don't have the stomach to continue with this endeavor. They use history as a learning tool, we on the other hand think compassion can win the world. WRONG!


rapidfire...
"Catholics, who also hate God ..." It's hard to know where to begin with that one, except to say that you are sadly mistaken.

Laura
Yep, almost as daft as "liberals hate America", but that doesn't stop that phrase coming up on almost a daily basis on Townhall...

New - evil forms of murder
You are so right on target about the evil of this enemy. I'd like some knowledgable theologian to tell the world where in the Koran it mentions that brutal death and destruction of one's own people is justified, forgive and you may still enter their kingdom in heaven.

This enemy is the worst of all enemies because they know no boundries. When children are used as part of your murderous plot, then you've become satan's messenger. The Japanese were brutal in WW2 - how many suffered under the torture and forced labor camps, and the Korean's during their war with us too.

When you think about how America fights a war, with clear boundries of discipline, rules of engagement, and value to human life...I think that puts us in a whole different class of fighter. Ok, some make mistakes, but they are few and we punish our own for being less that American's in values we hold dear.

Our enemies are creative for sure. That's why you see a new weapon being used in the last month or so. They've gotten hold of chlorine and who knows what else, and are incorporating it with exposives to do more damage to their own people. Ya wonder what the people are thinking now about those WMD's that we can't find...or perhaps did a select few know where they were and now being wither sold or distributed to the brutalist of extremists to chemically destroy their people and our troops if they get in the way.

The folks who though the WMD's were part of our plot to enter the war should now have second thoughts about their pre-judging the enemy tactics. Geez, Saddam found no problem with gassing the Kurd's and thousands more within his own country - HIS OWN PEOPLE. Don't forget, he also used gasses in Iran.

Folks, it's a war you'd rather see fought "over there" because you don't want to see nasty weapons being used on American streets. Hey, who knows what's already been brought in our country already on those un-inspected cargo ships and smuggled in though our open borders north and south.

It's said that God has a special place in heaven for good and rightous people - a paradise filled with white lace, lost relatives and green pastures...what will it have for brutal, evil messangers of satan - hopefully the firey brews of HELL!

Couldn't have anticipated what?
Like most people, you know nothing of history.
There is nothing "New" about the evil we are dealing with in Iraq. Almost everything that is happening in Iraq today took place 90 years ago. When the British occupied Iraq in 1917, they came as "Liberators" but were met by fierce resistance outside Baghdad. Humiliating treatment of prisoners and heavy-handed action in Najaf and Fallujah further alienated the local population and an insurgency developed. A planned handover of power proved unworkable.
Captured British soldiers were brutally tortured and their bodies were mutilated.
If the conservatives had ever bothered to study history, they would ave known exactly what we could expect in Iraq. But that would have been too much work.

To CB
Perhaps people would be less inclined to say that if the liberals ever had anything nice to say about America. As it is, it falls in one of those "shoe fitting" categories.

Vic
You've obviously never read any of my posts defending my position on America. I've written lots of very positive thiings about America. How does the phrase go - those you love the most have the greatest capacity to disappoint. I would think that neatly sums up how many liberals feel.

ZERO TOLERANCE
We are going to have to face reality and agree to leave if those guilty for prolonging the Iragi war in the manner they are employing with the killing of thier own people to make a point with this bargaining chip "Leave your people alone and let them have their free form of government, and leave the rest of the world alone and mind their own business and we will mind ours as long as we are not provoked in any manner or we will drop a neutron bomb on them..at least the innocent won't suffer. Perhaps (Doubtful perhaps) then the whole Arab world in the region will get serious about calming things down or risk getting the same . We need to let them know we will no longer subject our armed forces and their own innocent men, women , and children to their insane cruelty and we will no longer tolerate it there or any place in the world. Short and to the point! Meanwhile, we need to clean up this country from the top to the bottom...ZERO TOLERANCE on corruption, crime, immorality, and rid ourselves of an inept government whom won't do the will of the majority....and they want a raise...they don't even earn what they get now. "FREE THE TWO BORDER GUARDS NOW"

"liberals hate America"
1) Libs hate capitalism & love communism.
2) Libs hate the constitution of the USA - constantly either misrepresenting it or violating it to suit communist principals.
3) Libs hate the sovereignty of the USA - seeking to "sell us out" to global fascism (United Nations).

Anti-socialist
But pro-gibberish, obviously...

anti-socialist
Are these people liberals, or are they statists who advocate globalism? I ask, because our very own Republican President and select Republican congressmen, also appear to be advocating the 3 points that you mentioned.

Unfortunately, it appears that we have traitors on both sides of the aisle.

Islamofascists v National Socialists
I disagree that Nazi's topped Islamofascists for "sheer cruelty". Rather it's a matter of volume. The Islamists are just as cruel, if not moreso, they just lack the technical competence to match the achievements of 1940's Germany. I would be considerably more afraid of them when they can design and produce something like the Mercedes Benz. We can have some solace in the fact that when they attack us it will be with technology we developed. If they nuke us back to the stone age, we have the intellect to rebuild. They have never evolved beyond the stone age.

The answer to the question is how do you terrorize a terrorist. You must attack them on a level that they fear most. Clearly, they don't value life or family or children in the sense that the west does. They fear the afterlife. Certainly we must continue to hunt them down and destroy them. But then we should begin to wrap their bloated corpses in bacon and leave them to bake in the desert like a scallop. Give them what they most fear, the other white meat.

To CB
I wasn't referring to you specifically, I acknowledge that you indeed have not been overly critical of the US. That unfortunately, it not the normal behavior of the libs that post here, and especially not the case of the libs who make it to TV. Of course, TV news has an incentive to only show confrontation, therefore we can probably discount a lot of that.

Its just the simple
These "men" murder children, purposefully- the reason they murder children and cause violence is to create upheaval and tension. That upheaval causes the anti-war folks and the mainstream media to (for some inexplicable reason), blame the entire fiasco on Bush and Halliburton, rather than placing the blame where it belongs- on the persons, both foreign and Iraqi, who know nothing but how to make chaos and death.

Or, look at it this way- if Iraq stablized, we'd probably leave- but for whatever reason, the jihadists don't want that- they want murder, death, terror. Do any of you liberals ask why ?

You're being used. Its just that simple. You have become a willing dupe of terrorists, who are using you to undermine our country (yours AND mine). I have no idea why you'd want us to lose- I have no idea what is gained by constant comparisons to Vietnam- I have no idea what is gained by blaming Bush at this point (since he's a lame duck president).

Why don't you want your country to win ?

Vic
Appreciate your comment, and I am sure you are right about confrontational television. A civlised conversation, where both sides can see the merits in each others argument, doesn't make good television. Pity. But I also think that it is possible to be critical of policy without it meaning that you hate your country. I think Tony Blair is a disgrace, I think he has sold out every principle he may have once had and that Britain is a worse place for it But I love my country too and I am very proud to be British. Is an American liberal who criticises public policy any different? It is possible to love your country and criticise it at the same time. I know lots of liberal Americans - all of whom are intensly proud and patriotic at the same time. This "liberals hate America" mantra that runs through all things on Townhall is not only nonsense but is also incredibly divisive. America's problems aren't going to be resolved by repeating that ad nauseum.

Good point
Good point Dennis; many overlook the barbarity so that they can get to their real objective quicker--namely, blaming George W Bush for everything. Look at these responses: all you people oughta be generals and presidents, because you've obviously got it all figured out! Why if that stupid old "W" would just listen to you bunch of know-it-alls, we'd have either won this thing and would be singing kumbaya at a clam bake on the banks of the Persian Gulf, or, we would have never gone into Iraq in the first place because any idiot should have known there were no wmd and also that these Iraqis and Islamists are barbarians who gleefully kill their own kids for political objectives.
My goodness, 20/20 hindsight is a wonderful luxury, isn't it?
My feeling is that, regardless of the brutality of our opponent ( and it is substantial ) the USA and allies could have won this war by now if everyone who voted for the action, which was everyone, by the way, kept pulling on the same end of the rope, instead of half of them ( the Dem & RINO half ) dropping their part and pulling on the other side for purely political advantage, or out of sheer hatred of GW Bush.
I include all of you naysaying know-it-alls in that group. Heck, within days of Congress' authorization, before we even did anything, people were jumping ship and lining up to oppose the President. That's no way to win a war.
And the bad guys love it.

Mike Lee... I've been "gagged"
Someone gagged my post...I will say it again. Mike Lee are the ignorant one. Loyal Democrat is there, doing that. So get off your high horsesht cart and pay attention. Have you seen what LD has seen? I think not. He is our Reident satire man and naturally the truth hits you most when it illustrates your absurdity.
You are like any other lib who believes diplomacy will save the world and all children,too. Go now, be with your puke brother Penn, sing Kumbaya and start diplomatically solving the problems you see. I will say a prayer for you when the next attack happens on US soil, God Forbid and hope you see the truth. Your way of thinking "still" pi**es me off.

LD...in case you didn't get to read my gagged post...Nice to "see" you!

Add Alec Baldwin to the list,and Streisand, Robbins, Sarandon,Stone,Harry Belafonte...I could just keep going. Maybe they should make a "live For Jihad" album and all sing together in Arabic for a tune up of what will be to come should we lose the war...

typos, Shempy...
Nice post...and so true. Sorry for the typos to MikeLee But it looks like my "emotions" got the best of me...ah well, the truth will set me free.

Oh, p.s.
P.S.- I forgot to say that I still think that we are going to win in the end. Call me hopelessly optimistic, but I believe in America and the yearning for Liberty in the human heart. It's just going to take a lot longer because, sadly, half of our countrymen are fighting against it.

"Ending" a war
Anyone who has ever participated in a war knows that there are only two ways to "end" it; win or lose. Either you defeat the enemy, by destroying him and his will to fight, or he destroys you and your will to fight, and you surrender. Anyone who talks about "ending" a war, rather than winning it, is woefully shor of experience in war.
Despite what they say about supporting the troops, being patriotic, loving their country or other similar statements, by their actions the Dems constantly indicate that they want our troops and our country to lose. That is similar to a person saying, "I am a great fan of the Red Sox, but I know that they cannot win games, and I don't want them to win."
Far too many Americans suffer from a deficiency of determination and patience. They expect everything to be resolved an a couple of hours, with commercial breaks scattered through that time. They think that anything that takes more than a month or so to complete is way too long and drawn out. This war for civillisation rather than babarism is going to take a long time to win. The reality is that you either want us to defeat the fanatic mohammadan murderers, or you want them to defeat us. The Dems, and self-styled "liberals" appear to have chosen our defeat as their goal.

"Ending" a war
Anyone who has ever participated in a war knows that there are only two ways to "end" it; win or lose. Either you defeat the enemy, by destroying him and his will to fight, or he destroys you and your will to fight, and you surrender. Anyone who talks about "ending" a war, rather than winning it, is woefully shor of experience in war.
Despite what they say about supporting the troops, being patriotic, loving their country or other similar statements, by their actions the Dems constantly indicate that they want our troops and our country to lose. That is similar to a person saying, "I am a great fan of the Red Sox, but I know that they cannot win games, and I don't want them to win."
Far too many Americans suffer from a deficiency of determination and patience. They expect everything to be resolved an a couple of hours, with commercial breaks scattered through that time. They think that anything that takes more than a month or so to complete is way too long and drawn out. This war for civillisation rather than babarism is going to take a long time to win. The reality is that you either want us to defeat the fanatic mohammadan murderers, or you want them to defeat us. The Dems, and self-styled "liberals" appear to have chosen our defeat as their goal.

Blame Clinton
"It is, therefore, unfair to blame the Bush administration for not anticipating such a determined "insurgency"...

Dennis, as a right-winger, your argument would have been lot stronger if you had continued on this sentence and blamed Clinton for not anticipating the insurgency..if he didn't have the nation distracted with ML, he could have used the resources to predict the insurgency.

This handwringing is ridiculous
To say it was impossible to foresee this quagmire in Iraq shows how unaware of history and human nature Bush and his neocon apologists are. Of course it was predictable!!! It WAS predicted!!!
By our own military!!!! The administration, and particularly Rumsfeld chose not to listen to their own people.

Colin Powell: When you break it [Iraq] you own it.

Gen Shinseki: After Saddam you are going to need somewhere in the neighborhood of 300,000 troops to secure the peace.

Barrack Obama: even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences... an invasion of Iraq... will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and ENCOURAGE THE WORST, rather than best, IMPULSES OF THE ARAB WORLD, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

Brigadier Gen. Steve Hawkins: no fewer tahn 350,000 coalition forces will do ... (Hawkins was a general assigned to work on post war planning issues by the Army BEFORE the war) ... quoted in General Trainor's excellent book "Cobra II".

Lt. Col Steven Peterson: over a month before the war predicted the campaign would produce conditions at odds with meeting strategic objectives. The joint campaign was specifically designed to break all control mechanisms of the regime and there will be a period after regime collapse in which we would face the greatest danger to strategic objectives... a risk of influx of terrorists ... rise of criminal activity.. probable actions of former regime members... loss of control of WMD [that were assumed to exist]. (Quoted in "Cobra II" ... Peterson was planner on General Marks staff for the post war effort).

There is much more evidence of the sheer arrogance and incompetency of the commander in chief and secretary of defense in planning for the inevitable chaos in Iraq after deposing Saddam.

TO SAY THIS CHAOS AND QUAGMIRE IN IRAQ WAS UNFORSEEABLE IS A SLANDER AGAINST OUR MILITARY IN AN ATTEMPT TO SHIFT THE BLAME FROM BUSH/CHENEY AND RUMSFELD. Our military knew before going in that Iraq's defenses were essentially an empty shell. That even if the CIA and SecDef were wrong and there was some resistance they would take Baghdad and complete their mission to depose Saddam quickly. THEY KNEW THE REAL REQUIREMENT FOR TROOPS WOULD BE AFTER THE FALL, NOT BEFORE.

They told this story up the chain of command. Rumsfeld's response was to ignore them, and to insist on planning for rapid reduction in US forces in country as soon as Saddam's government fell.

THIS IS HISTORY FOLKS. It is documented. It is real, not opinion.

Stop wringing your hands and saying there is nothing that could have been done. Our military is NOT THAT STUPID, people!! Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Feith, Wolfowitz, Libby and all the neo-cons and conservatives that pull the strings on this idiot president you jerks elected twice ARE THAT STUPID.

By Analogy
Mr. Prager made some good points, but I think he missed a few as well.

1-What about the Irish? The Catholics and Protestants are prefectly willing to blow one another up although I will say that they generally did not use children for camoflage.

2-The Sunnis and Shia can tell one another apart. At the risk of drawin fire I can tell the difference between Baptist Churches, Presbyterian Churches, Lutheran Churches, Episcopal Churches and Catholic Churches. I'd be willing to bet that the Sunnis and Shia can do the same thing. There are also names that are common to one sect (e.g., Ali) that are seldom used by the other.

The thing we in the modern West are not accustomed to is the savagery.

Someone said that the US is not good at building democracies. This is only partly true. Our best examples are the Phillipines and South Korea. Neither had a democracy in place in 1950. Unfortunatley it takes more than four years to create a democracy. The culture must grow. BTW I know that both of those countries went through periods of repression before emerging as something approaching democracy.

The problem is...
... that this enemy will not be defeated by conventional military means. Just like the north vietnamese. I'm reminded of another quote from Apocalypse Now (sorry I'm a bit of a fan): "Charlie didn't get much USO. He was dug in too deep or moving too fast. His idea of great R&R was cold rice and a little rat meat. He had only two ways home: death, or victory." It strikes me that the religious fanatics behind the insurgency have a similar attitude. It's the attitude that has to be defeated and military might isn't going to do it. Blimey, even the French managed resistance during the Nazi occupation. If they can resist despite appalling treatment of the general population by the Nazis, why on earth does anyone think the Iraqi insurgents will give in?

"Ending" a war
Anyone who has ever participated in a war knows that there are only two ways to "end" it; win or lose. Either you defeat the enemy, by destroying him and his will to fight, or he destroys you and your will to fight, and you surrender. Anyone who talks about "ending" a war, rather than winning it, is woefully shor of experience in war.
Despite what they say about supporting the troops, being patriotic, loving their country or other similar statements, by their actions the Dems constantly indicate that they want our troops and our country to lose. That is similar to a person saying, "I am a great fan of the Red Sox, but I know that they cannot win games, and I don't want them to win."
Far too many Americans suffer from a deficiency of determination and patience. They expect everything to be resolved an a couple of hours, with commercial breaks scattered through that time. They think that anything that takes more than a month or so to complete is way too long and drawn out. This war for civillisation rather than babarism is going to take a long time to win. The reality is that you either want us to defeat the fanatic mohammadan murderers, or you want them to defeat us. The Dems, and self-styled "liberals" appear to have chosen our defeat as their goal.

Actually, NOT new
Muslims have been doing such atrocities to their own for over 500 years!

A fraction of them from the 20th (and early 21st) centuries only:
(1) Pakistan's atrocities against Bugti and Marri tribes in 1948 and 1965 (and continuing attacks against Baluch today)
(2) Hajamin Husseini's butchery of Arabs who even wanted to trade with Jews in 1920's-1930's
(3) Arafat's run of extortion, murder and mayhem against Lebanese (including Muslims)
(3) Arafat's threat in 1988 to "plug with 10 bullets" any "Palestinian" who wished to negotiate end to "intifada"
(4) Khomeini's murder of thousands of political prisoners between 1982 and 1989
(5) Saddam Hussein's atrocities, taken as a whole
(6) Pakistan's "Operation Searchlight" atrocities in 1971, considered to be second only to the Holocaust (both numbers and atrocity-level wise--only because the Nazis had actually build gas chambers!)
(7) Pakistan's further atrocities against its own population, 1977-1988 (described by opposition leader Ghulam Jatoi as "worse even than those done in Bangladesh"--though Banglas have a hard time believing it; either way, the description is horrific)

So, Ba'athists and Islamists of Iraq have only duplicated the tactics of Islamists and other thugs elsewhere in Muslim world!

svpallava
You make it sound like Islamic countries are the only ones that have commited atrocities. For the sake of balance, how about atrocities committed by allegedly Christian countries? You shouldn't have any trouble at all dragging up a similar amount of examples. What it tells us is this: religion, region and "civility" is absolutely no guide to man's inhumanity to man. Other than that, it's a complete red herring.

Jihad perspective is everything
The Islamists, both Sunni and Shia, believe that this is the ultimate jihad. We believe, because we have been convinced by the American media, that Sunni and Shia hate each other and therefore will not work together. We are told that is why they are killing each other in Iraq.

The tactics of the Islamists are well beyond any realm of reality for the average American. We have been told the only reason people commit evil acts is that they are or were somehow victims. Today there are even books trying to make out that Hitler was evil because he had been a victim earlier in his life. We have a hard time appreciating that there is true evil in the world or that religious people will use evil to obtain their religious goals.

A Muslim dying for, and just as importantly, in jihad assure that they see paradise. So we are faced with Muslim actually wishing to die in the name of jihad. We see Muslims place other Muslims in harms way whether the other Muslims wish to die in jihad or not. In their minds it is justifiable because if they are true Muslims then dying in jihad ensures paradise. If they are not true Muslims then they are worse than infidels and deserve to die. As a Muslim father or mother how can one ensure their children will reach paradise other than dying in jihad?

So we watched as Hezbollah, the Army of God, placed their families and friends in harms way knowing that at least some might die from the Israeli attacks. Their deaths provided two things an assurance of them going to paradise and also front page news in the American, if it bleeds it leads, media. In the Islamic media of course it was again the Jews killing Muslims and it doesn't matter who shot the first round.

While throughout history Sunni and Shia have fought each other, they are both Muslim placing them several steps above infidels, Christians and Jews. It is more important for them to kick out the infidels and unite the world under Sharia Law then to actually war with each other. SO an enemy of my enemy is my friend [until our mutual enemy is defeated then we will take care of each other.]

Remember Saladin was a Sunni Kurd, who organized Shia in Eygpt, to then re-united the Muslim world to kick the Crusaders out of the holy lands. Jerusalem stayed in Muslim hands from then until the end of WWI, with the defeat of the Ottoman Empire.

Muslims support the death penalty, removing one's head. slow hanging or stoning, for what we might consider lesser crimes. Muslims countries only did away with slavery because for a short time they were controlled by European governments. They believe Islam is a religion for the entire world. You might disagree but that does mean they are going to do their best to try. So we spend billions trying to reduce collateral damage during war; this enemy tries to spend as little as possible to kill has many as possible. If those that they kill just happend to be Muslim so much the better; paradise is only one shot away.

McCain for VP?
It occurs to me that Burgess Meredith (The Penguin in the old "Batman" series -- Mickey from "Rocky" would be second to Walter Brennan in capturing the true McCain. A good actor could extend McCains political life a few years.

Oops
Sorry folks. One got away from me. Now back to our regular programming.

coolnut
Your post to me earlier this morning is nothing more than the blathering of a useful idiot.

I find it stretching
credibility that all the libs on here "knew" what atrocities were going to happen. If they did anticipate how barbaric these people are, then why do they defend them. Why can't they see the danger the jihadists present to us and the entire world.

In one breath, we hear the left say conservatives are crazy because we see a threat. In the next breath they tell us they could anticipate all the death and destruction of these barbarians.

What a contradiction in their own minds.

The War is Over

.....We won it ....what we are trying to do now is to leave behind a stable government ...We occupied Germany and Japan under Martial Law for many years before we allowed them to govern themselves ...we still have troops and bases in both countries ...

.....why did we think it would be any different in Iraq? .....COLOSSUS

wbheff
The sad thing is that I don't think the Administration is fighting to win either; perhaps because of political constraints, perhaps not. The end result is the same.

Neo-Conned
Michael -- Israel is the evil that has us at war in Iraq. Their dual-citizen sons, the Neo-Cons, conned Bush/Cheney into going to war in Iraq when there was no sound reason for it, except to capture its oil and establish a so-called democracy in the Middle East that would be surreptiously controlled by the Sons of Israel, a land with no oil. These are the same Neo-Cons who have used their great power in the media to steal Christmas in the U.S. No Jew will die in Iraq for the Neo-Con cause. The casualties of this bloody war are primarily Christian soldiers. I look forward to voting next year for a president who is not a captive of the Israeli-first movement. If one does exist.

To CB
The difference between the Muslim countries and the nominally Christian countries is that when acts of barbarity are committed in the Christian countries they are roundly criticized by all but a few wingnuts. In Muslim countries they are celebrated by all but a few who remain hidden out of fear.

We Won the War

.....Against Saddam ...his government was toppled and he was executed ...

.....What we are fighting now is a general war against radical islamo-fascists supported by Iran and Syria ...the battle field is presently in Iraq ...

.....what the Democrats want us to do is to withdraw from the battlefield ...this will not end the war ...it will just postpone the next battle .....COLOSSUS

think
muslims are not all a bunch of murdering jihadist any more than all americans are homosexual thugs that hollywood likes to potray us as.
you would be suprised at how many people over here think that america is exactly like the movies portray it.
these people are not a bunch of ignorant savages.
we are used to freedom. we were born with it.
we take it for granted.
americans and most europeans very rarely witness death from disease, murder or war.
it's been a part of their daily lives for centuries.
all their government has ever done for them is murder and opress. so why should they trust it now?
that's why most of the people being targeted are stundents and professionals. a lot of them were educated in the U.S. or Europe. they know better.
that is why they are being murdered.
most people over here want the same things we want. freedom from fear, and a decent life, education, and job for themselves and their children.
they have never experienced these things.
it will take a long time for them to learn how
we can't quit just because it's tough

Dude
You are right, but they aren't going to see the light when the only methods being used by the west is military might. We're still making Iraq pay Kuwait back for the 1990 invasion, so they aren't even making a cent from oil at the moment... what chance rebuilding Iraq and changing minds when the place makes Grozny look like Disneyland? And what the Japanese did in China is every bit as dark as what the Germans did across Europe. Take a look at the pictures in "The Rape of Nanking" by Iris Chang, if your stomach is strong enough...

puzzling
This is a puzzling column. At first glance it looks like Prager simply doesn't have any sense of history. After all it was possible to predict the aftermath of our invasion since many people did, so if he is off on what was predictable. (Not of course on what was predictable by him).

He also seems bizarrely off on the history. What is happening in Iraq is not as bizarre or even vile as what happened in Cambodia after we destablizized that country for not supporting us enough in Vietnam. There the Khmere Rouge killed 1/3 of Cambodia's population with no civil war occurring.

That the loss of a ruthless leader can lead to genocidal civil war was shown in Yugoslavia a decade ago with the same kind of mass slaughter.

But Prager's idea that this is something unique likely does not come from this kind of bizarre ignorance of history so much as a twisted take on what is happening there. What is happening in Iraq is almost certainly similar to what happened in Bosnia, different ethnic groups committing attrocities to advance their own position in what ultimately emerges in the region.

But what Prager appears to have done is to conflate the Iraqis into a single group concerned only with us. So that what he sees them as doing is killing themselves to score points against us in the world. This has happened on a small scall with say self-immolation by monks in southeast asia. But would probably be really new and unpredictable if it was what was happening in Iraq. But how self-absorbed do you have to be to think that the Iraqis only thoughts are with the US and not with the future of Iraq?

Evil Incarnate
I agree with Ron... Islam has no place in the West, at all.

We did win
We won the war. The problem was after that we tried to build their nation and their government which we never should have done and was not our job.

Dude
I agree that packing up and leaving would be a bad idea, although I also struggle to see how this can be resolved without a very long term military presence in Iraq. Ultimiately American voters will have the final say; if we want to continue to live in a democracy it has to be that way. And that doesn't take into account Lynne who will surely repeat her top fact that in fact the US isn't a democracy it's a republic. Whatever. I also think that no country has become a democracy at the end of a gun barrel. Iraq won't ever be anything but an Islamic democracy at best; why shouldn't it be. It ain't going to convert en masse and America can hardly argue - it is a democracy based loosely on Christian principles after all. I totally agree dude - I can't for one second believe that the majority of people in the Middle East aren't fed up to the back teeth, to put it mildly, with suicide bombings at markets, schools, police stations etc. If it were a culture of death, as some observers would characterise Islam, why do they cry at funerals? A tiny fraction celebrate the death of a loved one. We seem to have chosen to support a tiny political elite in Iraq which in turn keeps real people out of politics. Iraq needs a Ghandi or a Mandela, but without security there is little chance of anyone standing up to be counted. it's a very depressing situation but not one without hope.
Thanks for asking; the wedding was great apart from the bride's father's speech. Luckily mine was last and saved the day... well, us liberals have all the best jokes after all!

Critical Bill writes:
"If they - ,French Resistance, - can resist despite appalling treatment of the general population by the Nazis, why on earth does anyone think the Iraqi insurgents will give in? "

Interesting correlation, Iraq insurgence versus French Resistance. The French Resistance had a very compelling mission that rested in the heart of nearly all of their countrymen, Freedom from tyranny. Do you really think that the Iraq insurgency offers the same attraction to their countrymen as the French Resistance did? Do you really think that the US forces are remembered best for their appolling treatment of the general population? Or, are you just having fun with irrelevant nonsense just for the sake of an argument?

it takes time
just because it's not given much press, doesn't mean we are not making progress.
any story that can't be slanted to make Bush look bad, is simply not reported.
surrender will only encourage them to bomb and murder

mike_lee
What a hypocrite you are. Since you see America as being a nation that commits more henious acts than the Muslim terrorists, why are you not over there fighting with them against U.S. troops? Instead, you remain here enjoying the economic benefits reaped by our imperialistic murderous ways while standing off in the corner wringing your hands together over the abuse we inflict upon the world.

So come on you big baby, if you truly are disgusted with the United States, rescind your citizenship of our foul nation, and go join your like-minded bretheren over in the Middle East. Oh wait, that will mean you can't enjoy our lifestyle while simultaneously attempting to distance yourself from our ideology.

Not irrelevant Mac
There are similarities between the French resistance and the insurgency in Iraq. The majority of the French population may have had sympathies with the resistance but those who actually took part were a tiny minority. The resistance in France was armed by the British, primarily, and many agents worked behind enemy lines. Similarly, the insurgents in Iraq may only be a tiny minority but they may well have the sympathy of many Iraqi civilians - doesn't something like 70-odd per cent of the population want foreign soldeirs to go home? The compelling mission was freedom from tyranny in France, but do the iraqis see it any differently? And are they not supplied and helped by Saudis and Iranians? I don't know if the attraction is the same but the insurgents aren't working witout the support of many of their countrymen. When I mentioned treatment of the French by the Nazis, I didn't mean that American (and British) soldiers are the same. What I meant to illiustrate is that upping the ante in military aggression terms doesn't necessarily mean that resistance will crumble. On the contrary, it will get stronger. I don't think it's entirely irrelevant - one has a romanticised good v evil attachment, the other doesn't. That's about the only difference.

One quicky - - -
This whole exercise in Monday Morning Quarterbacking, remorse and gnashing of teeth would have been very unnecessary IF Dubya had NOT pursued a Politically Correct "no-win" war and had Gone for Victory 2-3-4 YEARS AGO.

But, no, the McClellans in the Pentagon and Dubya's lack of strength in showing strength in a tough prosecution of the mess -- a dismal performance, nothing less.

And we're hurting.

Temptation
I tried to resist, I really did, but I just couldn't.
"well, us liberals have all the best jokes after all!"
Yes, indeed; Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Michael Moore, Rosie O'Donnell, Albert Arnold Gore, Jimmy Carter, the Hildebeast, Slick Willie, The entire New York Times, The Senior sot from Chappaquiddick, John Edwards, Barrack Obama, little Jackie Murtha, the list of jokes goes on and on!

wbheff
There are a lot of jerks on both sides of the political spectrum. I could list a simmilar number of Republicans. However, I was of course referrring to jokes as in those told by comedians. So on your side you have Dennis Miller, Bob Hope and Ann Coulter. And on the liberal side anyone else who has ever told a joke ever. So there you go - you're a bit outnumbered!

Oh yeah
You get Andrew Dice Clay too.

To Nee
First off I'm not a liberal, I've only voted for one Democrat my whole life. Bill Clinton for Governor of Arkansas. I chose to not vote for bush but I didn't vote for Kerry either. My first election I voted for Reagen - that was a leader.

Armies beat other standing armies and America is number one at that. But we suck at police actions and in fact we have never been successful in a police action.

The idea that liberals hate America is absurd, how can you hate your own homeland? It's the yes men who followed Bush blindly that have caused so much trouble - they are the unpatriotic ones. Put it another way, if you don't punish your kids for stealing from moms purse and instead make excuses are you a good parent? Bush and his puppet senate did horrible things in our name and I'm going to let my voice be heard. I do firmly believe is is guilty of war crimes and should be tried. America is not above the law despite what you few isolationists think. That doesn't work anymore - we cannot sustain our way of life without trading partners, partners must be given power and rights. No one expects America to remain the super power much longer, I think Nato is already more powerful then America. India and China are right on our heels. When we are less important to the world economy all this stuff will come back to haunt us.

Sawgunner
You gave it up! Way to go! That guy ticked me off early and continues mindlessly. Have you been to the Guuny's blog for the Gathering of Eagles after action reports? They are probably on page 3 or 4...We gave the Antis a run for their money. Glad to "see" you around.

Prager's "crocodile tears" for Iraqis

Mr. Prager;

If murdering the innocent bothers you- why don't you take up a collection to defend the innocent-on your show!? Maybe if your "wonderful" American troops would stop taking guns from the innocent- they could protect themselves! (don't deny that they are doing that).Maybe if we sent innocent Iraqis some personal protection devices- they wouldn't be so easily murdered by the bad guys!

Hope you appreciate my following internet post:

Most Americans (including members of Congress) are insensitive, heartless cheapskates!

Why?

You can afford to give Iraqi children- pencils, paper and a few books but what about things they really need to STAY ALIVE- so they CAN learn!

Like: a flak jacket, a steel helmet and an armoured school bus!!!

Too expensive for you!

You Americans, your military and your government are really DETESTABLE!

Mike Corman (NOT a proud American)

misterfact@yahoo.com




the key to counterinsurgency
The key to effective counterinsurgency is enough MANPOWER.

Every expert on counterinsurgency who wasn't being muzzled by the Bush Administration understands that.

Why don't people here understand that with fewer than 200,000 troops, we simply cannot win this counterinsurgency war? You just don't have enough troops to hold cleared neighborhoods, no matter how cleverly you shuffle the troops around, no matter how much you have the "will" to win the war, no matter whether the Democrats are on board, no matter anything. You can't escape basic geography.

The idea that "the war ended in 2003" is BULL. The war to topple Saddam ended in 2003. BUT starting later that year, a full-blown insurgency got started which is NOT normally part of democracy-building and nation-building. We didn't have to face that in postwar Japan or Germany, or even in the Balkans where we sent peacekeeping troops. The Japanese and Germans formally surrendered and ceased hostilities, remember?

We have been fighting a COUNTERINSURGENCY WAR ever since. Don't even bother to call the deaths of 3,000 KIA in combat anything but a "war."

I can tell you, if conservatives go into the 2008 campaign and try to sell the American people on any more such delusions, they are going to get clobbered. November 2008 will be the biggest electoral wipeout for the GOP since 1964.

In his speech on January 10, Bush himself took full responsibility for not sending enough troops. So be it. Stop trying to get Bush off the hook. He's too honest and he knows better than to try to shift the blame for insufficient troop levels to the Democrats. (Whose signature appears on the war plan, Pelosi's or Rumsfeld's?)

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
You CANNOT go before the American public with any more bull.

The GOP MUST come clean. It MUST admit how badly Bush screwed up. It must NOT keep trying to shift the responsibility elsewhere.

Otherwise the entire GOP is going to get dragged down to electoral disaster in 2008.

Forgive me if someone...
has already stated this, but

Mr. Prager wrote, "that they would target their own people, especially the most vulnerable, for murder."

What Dennis is failing to realize is that liberals can also be included in this group. These libs have no problem exterminating their own children prior to birth.

So the terrorists in the Mid-East have support among the Dims and RINOs who support abortion. Then again, these people still refuse to refer to abortion as "murder" since the child has "yet" to be born.

"Prospect-be-damned! It is just a lump of flesh," explains the usual liberal.

The libs go on to explain, that "there must be sacrifice!" They sound just like terrorists.

When your "God" allows you access to "heaven" if your death involves the death of a non-believer, then you must be granted "greater" appreciation if you can make a small sacrifice as well. Granted, the two losers who drive the car left their kids in the car to blow up with the explosives.

Dude
None of them are comedians. That was a bit random wasn't it? I mean, you have your Coulters, Limbaughs, Becks, O'Reillys, Gibsons, Hannitys, Savages etc etc. There are loonies aplenty on both sides. Like many of the posters on Townhall, yourself excluded.

grrr
Dude stop with the name calling it drags the whole board down and makes us all look dumb.

Mike__Lee
Mike_Lee, I hope for your sake that you’re between 14 and 17 years old. If you’re over 18, you’re an utter idiot. Here’s the breakdown of your mindless drivel:

“Our country has killed more little girls then all the terrorists in the world put together. someone mentioned Japan, that was a vengeful attack on a country of women and children. Every able bodied man was in the war at that point. The firebombing was especially cruel and unnessasary.”


Cruel and unnecessary? Had Harry Truman (D-MO) not authorized a nuclear attack on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, millions more (Americans AND Japanese) would have died. At that time, Japan was governed by the Samurai code of ethics, which holds that surrender is always, under ALL circumstances morally impermissible. Japan was enlisting women and children to prepare for the American invasion. They would have fought till there were no more Japanese left. In fact, they refused to surrender even after the first bomb was dropped over Hiroshima, and the military leadership unsuccessfully attempted to prevent the Emperor from surrendering after the second bomb. So, had America not nuked Japan, millions of Japanese women and children, as well as American soldiers would have perished. Study your history, son.

“There are two sides to each argument and both sides have valid points”

This statement epitomizes the irrational doctrine of moral relativism. Every argument has two sides, but not all sides of the argument are valid. For example, the Nazi argument that Jews should be wiped off the face of the earth isn’t exactly valid, now is it?

In response to this factual statement,

“During the Iran-Iraq War of 1980, Iranians sent children as cannon fodder marching through battlefields.”

You drooled the following:

“Bullsht, utter hysteria and rehashed Sadamn propaganda, come on dude. You seriously think Iran gathered up their children and marched them through mine fields? You've never met an Iranian I guess. They're just like us only bigger, and the men hold hands, but other then that they don't have horns or tails and have the same dreams we do.”

Haha. Well, someone already beat me to citing a reference for this unambiguous historical fact, but I find it interesting (and extremely depressing) that you—a moral relativist if there ever was one—are oblivious to the presence of evil. The Iranian political and religious leaders are NOT like us. They’re murderous theocrats who execute adulterers, homosexuals, “infidels”, and scores of other humans who do not embrace their barbaric religion. I particularly liked your “hold hands” line. I guess you weren’t aware of the fact that all open homosexuals in Iran are in closed caskets. I would advise you to do some research on the Iranian regime, before posting on the subject.

“We are reaping the fruit of years of raping and looting that region, of using the CIA to meddle in the affairs of sovereign nations all the while exuding a smug sense of superiority because we were too ignorant to realize our culture isn't better then their culture - we like it cause it's ours.”

Yes, you’re right, our culture which abolished slavery 150 years ago is no better than the cultures who maintain the practice. Our culture is no better than the cultures that practices forced female circumcision. Our culture is no better than the Sudanese culture that likes their share of genocides or the North Korean culture that likes to shoot people who don’t care for their leader.

Do you at least realize that if you were living in Iran or North Korea, you would be shot—as in KILLED—for criticizing the regime or the regime’s preferred “culture”? Probably not.



The end Goal
If the goal in Iraq was not to establish a free and democratic society, then indeed we made a mistake. That we couldn't forsee the barbarity of the insurgents is ludicrous. We already knew the atrocities of Sadaam and his Sunni supporters. To expect them to play nice once Sadaam was out of the way is not reasonable. A lot of mistakes were made but that doesn't mean we should give up. I challenge anyone to cite a major conflict where mistakes were not made. We learn from them and take corrective actions. We do not give up on the mission. If we do give up, then we have truly sacrificed our blood and treasure for nothing.

Retarded
Yes we're losing the war because on one occasion some sick fanatics blew up two children in a car. Makes perfectly good sense.

It's not because there was an overwhelming pre-war civil hatred in the county which we destabilized in to a full blown conflict.

It's not because we had no plan or real motive going in.

It's not because a military presence can not counter-act the extremists willingness to die for a cause.

It's not the obvious belief that the US as a Judeo Christian country is persecuting Muslims.

It's not because we killed countless Iraqi women and children to incite additional hatred for the US for a war based on some lie concerning WMDs.

NO - It's a "NEW EVIL"exemplified by a pretty isolated instance of insanity.

What a bunch of sugar coated pro-war nonsense this is.

Defeatist Mike
Here are some good things happening in Iraq- just in case you might want to know.

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,9294,2-10-1460_2086580,00.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17783212
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21431127-2703,00.html

Your defeatist attitude is all I need to label you left-minded. You really do see that we are the big bad wolf. Your voting record doesn't tell me that you are not a liberal. Your thought process does. Let's see. The job of the President is to "support and defend the Constitiion of the USA against all enemies foreign and domestic. As far as I am concerned, you are a domestic enemy. Bush has not wavered and has made the decision based on what he believed to be protecting and defending. If he should be tried for war crimes,then so should all of those who voted for the war,now against it for political power-and using the troops as pawns but not wanting to be held responsible for their actions. Very typical and it will come back to them in spades.

Like I said, get with your anti-brothers and start singing Kumbaya. Diplomacy is not the answer...and whether you believe you are patriotic or not, any words espousing that the US actions taken since 9/11 are worse than the what the terrorists did is treason to me. Plain and simple.
The USA will always be the Greatest nation on this earth and that will not wain despite the efforts of others to bring it down. We are the best example of what other nations can only dream of. You anti people just don't get it. They want to be free...have no fear, own nice things, have good health care, education...the list goes on. You are ungrateful to say the least and Sawgunner got it right. Read Moondoggy's posts, too. get a clue.

CB
Be careful about quoting misleading polls...here's the rest of the story:

The ABC/Time/BBC poll asked "How long do you think the US and other coalition forces should remain in Iraq?" The results:

26% said "leave now."
19% said "remain until the Iraqi government is in place."
16% said "remain until the Iraqi security forces can operate independently."
31% said "remain until security is restored."
3% said "remain longer but leave eventually."
1% said "never leave."
4% expressed no opinion.

MoveOn and other moonbat sites tried to spin this just like you did....sadly, most of the sheeple don't take the time to get the full story.....and yet another liberal myth becomes fact.

Palestinians
How about the Palestinians? They are now teaching
their innocent children, babies to be sucide bombers. The first woman sucide bomer's little daughter, about 4 or 5 yrs of age is being paraded across Palestine TV showing her with the hamas green clothing and wearing a plastic sucide vest. What kind of people, what kind of brain, what kind of heart do these people have is beyond my understanding. They only thing that I can understand is that this is a cultural, a religion of Satan who demands a blood sacrafice with more expected everyday of these brain washed people. I feel pity for these confused, angry, people who are unable to love themselves and so they cannot love others.

HAC
Yep, you nailed it...this whole war was just just made up so Christians could persecute innocent muslims.

We are truly blessed to have such divine wisdom grace our humble site. Thank you for your insight and inspirational comments....I'll be first in line when you release your first book.

Icedog
I admit to going by memory on that number. So one poll puts the number at 45 per cent. Big deal. That the best you can do to refute my post? That's a generous D- for you me old son.

Icedog
Ice, check my blog for an article FROM AN IRAQI IN IRAQ not some shriveled nutsack libwad writing an anti-war article from DC!

Also, need a laugh? No, not from reading CB's posts but check the PIC I posted. Calling Jon Carry and The Goreacle, the libscum's newest superheroes!

Nee
Great post. I can sense all 59" of you quivering in anger! haha.

Critical Bill
I eveb have a post for you. Called "Scumbaggery, British Style."

Those 15 Brits seized by the Iranians should be glad that they don't have Jimmy the Scumbag Karter as their PM or they'd have to expect 442 more days of captivity.

Mister fact
I posted a comment on your blog...but here, I'll jsut do it again. Open up your mouth really wide, really wide. Now put your Unproud american foot right in...Sawgunner is serving in Iraq currently and so your mindless spewing that he has no facts, don't hold too much water over there on your blog. You may be a vet, but clearly you are no thinker. Maybe those quarter notes you might be playing are taking up valuable brain space.

misterfact
Actually, the "fact" is, Iraqis are allowed to retain possession of their firearms - fully automatic AK-47's, something no American can do without a lot of permits.

Out of curiosity, just what countries and forms of government do you appreciate? And what cause would you consider worth risking your life to promote or defend?

GunnyG
Yeah, saw that. Anyone ever point out to you that that sunglasses and moustache combo make you look like a nonce?

Sawgunner
Good post but just a point of clarification here.

If you want to own an automatic weapon, all you have to do is fill out a Form 4 and have it signed by the Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO) of the city or county you reside in. His signature merely certifies that he knows of no state or local laws that prohibit the ownership of the weapon and that he knows of no legal reason that you personally can not own the weapon. You must also send in a fingerprint card and a Citizenship Certification form along with a check for the $200 transfer fee. This is a one time only fee.

In 6-180 days, you will receive an approved Form 4 back at which time you may take possession of your machine gun.

And blast away legally!

Critical Bill
D*mn, it must be H*ll for you to be so jealous of me! You poofters are all alike.

Gunny
As an afficiaonado of all things British I was sure you would know that a nonce is in fact a prison slang term for a paedophile. As Prince said, you got the look...

Top Five Reasons to Abandon Iraq
Top Five Reasons to Abandon Iraq

1. It must not be that important. After all; the commander in chief George W. Bush told me the only thing I needed to do was to go to the mall and buy stuff; like duck tape.
2. “Our culture is just as bad as their culture” why defend it?
3. "We have looted and raped that region for decades; it is time to stop."
4. "We can loose this one and still survive"
5. "Other countries just want to be left alone"

Bush is accused of lying; he is even accused of fabricating 9/11. But; if he really is this evil genius why did he not turn the emotion of 9/11 to galvanize and mobilize this nation?

Why, in the heck, did he tell us to go buy duck tape?
Why is it Democrats that mobilize to defeat the military impetus of this nation while Republicans, for the most part, ignore or even vilify; the Minutemen Project, Gathering of Eagles, and any other patriotic endeavor?

My guess is just as good as anyone; but I believe Republicans are afraid of a mobilized nation. Democrats are too, they just were too weakened by the country’s mood at the beginning of it all, to counteract the rebellion of the extreme left. The balance of power was in favor of the “peculiar.”

Is “our culture not any better than theirs?”

Really?

Do we force people to pray five times a day under the threat of corporal punishment?
Do we allow only one religion and only one religious book inside our borders?
Do we believe Jews to be sub-human?
How do we treat women?
Is it Abu-Grabe and Guantanamo really as bad under us as it was under Saddam?

Now, let’s analyze the “looting and raping:”

Ancient Mesopotamia has been looted and raped by:

The Assyrians, The Babylonians, The Persians, The Greeks, The Sassanids, THE ARABS, the Mongols, The Turks, The Safavids of Iran, The Ottomans, The Britts, and Saddam Hussein.

It is a fertile, rich piece of real state in a bad neighborhood.

Liberals believe that borders are permanent lines drawn on the ground with a thick Sharpie ®

Actually, nations exist because armies exist, just like your nice middle class bedroom community exists because of an armed martial organization called ‘the police.’

Poles are not Russian, are not German, because they push themselves against the push of both neighbors.

If Iraqis don’t push back against Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Syria, they’ll be gobbled up by their neighbors. Or survive as a Shiite puppet regime of Teheran.

The last time we ‘stopped interfering’ in the region was when the ‘righteous’ Jimmy Carter decided that the Iranian Shah was a bad man put in power by the CIA and that if we would just withdraw; the Iranian people would enter into a new era of peace and love. But they didn’t.

It is called “balance of power” and it means that if the USA is weaker that does not translate into ‘hippie peace loving nation’ but into a “stronger someone else.”

Capicci?

When we moved out of Iran the Russians moved in. Who would you know is building those pesky nuclear power plants today? Who invaded Afghanistan?

The only way the US can become like your beloved Socialist Scandinavian countries is if we invent another mighty military power to guarantee our security. But there is none.

Europe can be cute the way they are ONLY because we guarantee their security. Otherwise they would have to cut their vacation time to pay for their military.

Which takes me to the next point; can we really loose this one and survive?

Evidence is to the contrary. When the Soviet Union collapsed we though the world would become most peaceful and we will reap a “peace dividend.” We gutted the military.

Worldwide, the number o casualties from terrorist acts skyrocketed. Starting with Bill Clinton in the middle 1990’s. I am not saying ‘because’ of Bill Clinton we were all in this “go to the mall” mentality.

“The eight year period 1987-1994 saw 9,575 global casualties from terrorism. But over the next nine years the (1995-2003) the total jumped to 27, 608.” (Thomas Barnett)

Our economy is based in oil. Not just your SUV, but the plastics that make our health industry, the composites that make our aeronautics industry, our medicines, our computer chips.

Do countries just ‘want to be left alone?’ Did we stay put after Great Britain withdrawn in our small thirteen colonies? Or are we still expanding?

Turks were at the gates of Vienna once, but Europe pushed back. The question is do we bring Islam into the global economy or do we allow the forces of “turning the clock back” to fester and eventually expand?

Is it better to fight a 200 pound gorilla or a 500 pound gorilla?

RON
Ron, I'm with you. Islam should be outlawed as a religion in our society and no Muslim should be allowed to step forth on our soil. Until Islam undergoes a reformation, they are a danger to America.

What the heck...
is duck tape?

Oh! You meant duct tape!

So sad.

Slugger, you boob, the oil is still in
the hands of the Iraq government. The only difference now is that the proccededs of which are not the sole property of an egomaniac dictator used to keep himself in complete control of the Iraqi people.

Therefore your assertion that we went there to "capture" Iraqs Oil is a lie. And once more you know it but you will keep telling that same lie over and over again because you wish to frame this war as imoral so that you may feel moraly just rather than just cowerdly for opposing it and to prevent anyone from coming along and asking you to possibly put your life on the line for our country.

misterfact
For someone who calls himself that you seem to lack alot of facts. so tell me genius, do you wear a flak jacket, helmet, and carry a gun to protect yourself from crime? Or do you pay taxes and train your police force and military? What's more cost effective? What works better? Misterfact seems to lack critical thinking skills.

Hmmm....
The libs on this thread prove Coulter right. IQ tests should be administered before allowing people to vote. I am seeing a whole lot of lies and simpleton logic from the libs on this thread.

Dealing with Evil
I agree with Ron. Any person that openly advocates the killing of innocent people just because they don’t go to their Church, that individual is a Dangerous Idiot. But when it is a whole Group or Organization that advocates the destruction of all other peoples who do not agree with their concept of the Deity, then that Group or Organization does not deserve to continue to exist. Certainly that Group should not be allowed to exist inside the Country of those it proposes to kill, overthrow, and dominate as their slaves. That would be the same as allowing wolves to live among your sheep heard. Even worse, for the USA, it would be like giving “special protection” to the wolves while they live among your sheep.

We need a Constitutional Amendment that makes it “Illegal (a Felony equal to Treason) for any Individual or Group to Advocate the violent overthrow of the American Government or its Constitution, or to support any Group, Creed or Document that promotes these actions.”

We did not have these problems of Insurgents/Gorillas in German and Japan for the simple that these enemies were completely beaten and destroyed before we occupied their Countries. You CANNOT WIN a limited War. We should also never send in any of our troops to another Country unless and until they are completely beaten and destroyed. If we are not willing to do that then we should not get involved directly into the War. Sell them weapons, but do not let them establish their Cells in our Country.

Remove ALL ILLEGAS form our Country and Seal our Borders. Know who is here and what they are doing or we will surely face the same problems with Islam that France, Germany and England are now facing.


To GunnyG
Due to the Firearms Owner’s Protection Act of 1986 you can not legally own an automatic weapon unless it was manufactured before 1986, thus producing a sunset clause on the 2nd amendment.

http://www.guncite.com/journals/hardfopa.html

The provision for automatic weapons was added by the House at the last minute (House controlled by Dems) and accepted by the Senate (Republicans had a 6 person majority, meaning that with the RINOs the dems controlled the Senate also.)

In order to own a post 1986 auto weapon you must have a class III dealer license.

CB
You state, "...70-odd per cent of the (Iraqi)population..." want us to go home.

I prove to you that your comments are wrong and the actual number is 26% (the rest want us to leave when their country/government is secure...the SAME thing we want).

You then come back and say you saw a poll somewhere that said 45%....and then you declare yourself victorious!?!

I'll admit, you're not nearly as rabid and frothing as some of our regular moonbats...you sometimes actually attempt to address or debate challenges, but you are definitely a lib.


Icedog
Don't forget the poll that states 78% of Iraqis do not believe they are in a civil war. However, I know from personal experience how easy it is to slant polls. Can we really put any stock into any of them? Polls have become the new and most efficient way of manipulating the public. Better to do the right thing and the polls be damned.

CB
Comparing Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Hannity to Sarandon, Penn and Fonda is not exactly accurate. The first set has made their name and career doing political commentary; the second set kept their mouths shut until they were already rich, powerful and successful, then decided the time was right to open their mouths. They mistook an ability to act as a mandate to tell us what they feel and how we should act in response to those feelings. The other group had to have some significant smarts to reach the level in their field where millions listen to them. You can disagree with the message of either, but to compare the two is unfair. PS-where would you place Ms. Jeanine Garafolo- political pundit or Hollywood loudmouth? I liked her early in her career but she now seems too darn angry.

Dude
Penn is an azz. He should go live somewhere else and see how long his mouth keeps flapping bullpucky.

Of course savagery coud be predicted
What is he talking about the savagery couldn't be predicted. There were the reports of the actions of Saddam's regime itself to predict it. People being thrown into acid baths, brides by kidnapped after their wedding to be raped by Saddam's sons. There was the mutilation of the Kuwaiti's by Iraqi troops. There were the torture chambers in Saddam's prisons. Who were doing these things, why Iraqi's of course so what is this you couldn't predict the savagery business?

Massachusettsliberal
rather then once again rebutting your ignorant drivel, I will just say this:

you do know that DICK CHENEY--your boogie man--was the Secreatary of Defense during the fisrt Gulf War, right? How do you think he did?


catalina
I fully supported the invasion of Afghanistan, that was just and proper. I served in the US Air Force so it's not like I'm a punk kid who lives on daddy's dime. It's the invasion of a sovereign nation with no point or purpose. Perhaps you forgot but no one supported attacking Iraq but George Bush. People got on board afterward because that's what you got to do. Saddam was certainly a bad guy and did terrible things but remember the first person to gas Kurd Civilians was Winston Churchill. We hunted the leader of a sovereign nation down and had him hung. That is not how a civilized people act. We ignored all of our advisers because George Bush is a spoiled man who has to get his way. As countries bailed left and right we couldn't see our error - some of you still don't see it. We were wrong that's why countries abandoned us, it's not because they hate Americans. And even though we have destroyed a nation, killed untold numbers of Iraqis, lost 3000 of our finest young men, spent (borrowed) so much money that literally your grandchildren will still be paying for it. All this for something that amounts to no more then a whim of an egotistical man. And if you've never had a George Bush type as a boss you never been to Texas.

So tell me why we are there? I know why we were in Europe in 1942, Korea made more sense then Vietnam and Vietnam made more sense then Iraq which makes no sense.

Taxachussetts Marxist...
Do please elaborate and fill the room with your knowledge.

I want chapter and verse, citations, references, historical facts, in other words, the whole nine yard about lazy conservatives who have no ability to make sound decisions, have no diplomatic skills, etc., etc.

Short of that, why don't you just go away and type your epithet laden, whining drivel over at Koz, huffpost, and all the other wastes of cyber space on the left....

Gunny G....
Something to check out concerning freshman Senator Jim Webb. Seems he gave his aide a loaded handgun, and the aide was arrested trying to take it into the Senate building with him. Oooooops.

Now Webb is stating that he never gave the handgun to Thompson.

It will be interesting to see how this one shakes out.

War is Simple

.....And like Nature it is cruel ...

.....to win you have to kill the enemey including his women and children until you break his will to resist .....COLOSSUS

Shameless
plug for my blog. I now have Chapter IV of Juliet Smith's Diary on my site.
http://www.peppermintsplace.townhall.com

Come on over. Some of the conservatives might find themselves in my new series.

We don't have enough troops or blood
We don't have enough troops or blood to "win" this war. Our enemies can keep killing children because they've got lots of children to sacrifice. We do not.

What Americans generally don't get, especially Bush and his policy-makers, is that we are dealing with people who REALLY do not share our beliefs about reality. It is laughable (and horrible) that our country has sacrificed so much to try to bring "democracy" to the Iraqis.

I have students and young friends who have served several tours in Iraq, and, like many, I've heard my share of stories about the barbarians for whom these young men and women have risked their lives. One young man, career Army, a life-long family friend, started off thinking he could help improve the lives of the Iraqis. At the end of his third tour he admits that he hates them, all of them. He's seen one too many young women beaten on the street by her father, one too many Iraqis who tried to work with Americans tossed dead, brutalized, and broken aginst the FOB front gates one morning. He's a tough kid, right-wing as they come, but now he doesn't think we're doing the right thing in Iraq.

Prager only documents what anyone who knows something about the culture involved might have predicted. We are not now protected our country by remaining in Iraq, and more Americans there means more targets, to add to the many already living in that miserable nation.

War is Simple II

.....when a country becomes too civilized to wage total war ...then they can no longer win ...war is not a game that can be won if one side restricts itself with rules while the other side does not ...there is no such thing as a civilized war .....COLOSSUS

Enablers drool...
...Leftinistra slobber.

I am a veteran. I have faced Islamofascists.

Every time I hear some inanity like "we can't do it", it makes my skin crawl with rage.

Defeatists should be hung at every village square.

Shoulda Seen It Coming
"The more innocent the Iraqi, the more likely he or she is to be targeted for murder. I submit that there was no way to anticipate this. And no one did." Dennis Prager.

Oh, please. After Operation Desert Storm had driven Iraq out of Kuwait, and routed the Republican Guard, many demanded that US forces press on to Baghdad and topple Saddam.

Dick Cheney, then Bush Sr.'s Secretary of Defense, was quoted as saying that act would unleash a tide of sectarian violence and ethnic cleansing. Just as it had in the former USSR and Czechoslovakia.

What happened during the next 10 years to change Cheney's mind? An act of extreme terrorism against this nation *on our own soil*.

Did that act lead to a fresh examination of our often confusing, contradictory policies in the Middle East? No. Instead, we invaded Iraq -- with utter disregard for the predictable consequences.

Should we pull out? No. We can't, not while sectarian strife rages and an unstable government cannot guarantee even minimal safety for its citizens. And we certainly cannot permit Iran -- our historical nemesis in the ME -- to step in and fill the vacuum.

As Colin Powell said: You break it, you own it.


mike_lee
All this talk of killing people is disturbing. Just 4 years ago you wouldn't hear such things so glibly tossed out. I want the old America back dammit. We are not at war with the Iraqi people so talk of killing the women and children is just plain creepy.

Shoulda Seen It Coming
"The more innocent the Iraqi, the more likely he or she is to be targeted for murder. I submit that there was no way to anticipate this. And no one did." Dennis Prager.

Oh, please. After Operation Desert Storm had driven Iraq out of Kuwait, and routed the Republican Guard, many demanded that US forces press on to Baghdad and topple Saddam.

Dick Cheney, then Bush Sr.'s Secretary of Defense, was quoted as saying that act would unleash a tide of sectarian violence and ethnic cleansing. Just as it had in the former USSR and Czechoslovakia.

What happened during the next 10 years to change Cheney's mind? An act of extreme terrorism against this nation *on our own soil*.

Did that act lead to a fresh examination of our often confusing, contradictory policies in the Middle East? No. Instead, we invaded Iraq -- with utter disregard for the predictable consequences.

Should we pull out? No. We can't, not while sectarian strife rages and an unstable government cannot guarantee even minimal safety for its citizens. And we certainly cannot permit Iran -- our historical nemesis in the ME -- to step in and fill the vacuum.

As Colin Powell said: You break it, you own it.


Dennis Prager - you are surprised, why?
Dennis, why are you surprised? The British in the first half of the 1900s and the Russians in the second half of the 1900s experienced the exact same mad-dog brutality in that part of the world that we are experiencing now.

I can understand Bush being surprised, with his proudly self-proclaimed avoidance of books. But you, Dennis?! I'm surprised that you are surprised!

To catalina
Actually, attempting to limit collateral damage to civilians during a war is a new thing that came about temporarely during a period from the late 1700s until the near end of the civil war. The northern armies of Sherman gladly abandoned this policy in their infamous march to the sea. The US The US attempted to limit damage to civilians in conflicts after WWII. The US and a few other western countries have tried to do this based on the precepts of the Geneva Convention and the Rules of warfare.

Unfortunately not many countries, other than us, adhere to the Geneva Convention.

Mike Lee
Do you feel better now...War is hell and it can get just plain creepy,hey? Toughen up.

It's not a new evil;
It’s not a new evil; it’s a relearning of an old evil. I have read that Japanese war plans for repelling the anticipated American invasion in 1945, included having Japanese school children run toward American troops with explosive charges in their book bags. This is believable to me because I had a Korean professor in college who lived through WWII in Korea. The Japanese authorities told his people in his village that the Americans would eat their children. Everyone hid their children and cowered behind locked doors when Americans liberated their town. In addition, I have seen films of Okinawan mothers throwing their children to their deaths over cliffs during the Battle of Okinawa. They had also been told that the Americans would eat their children. In the face of un-refuted lies, people will believe anything, and will sacrifice their children in the belief that it is better than what might happen to them. Who knows what lies were told to the children or parents in this latest case?

suicide bombings
Remember how offended (or not) your were the first time you saw a shirt that said, "Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out"
Here is that statement put into practice.
Now how do you feel about it?

To Gribnif
The difference is they are actually doing it and have been since the dawn of time, we only joke about it. When they do things like that it is a hard sell to your own troops to say they can't retaliate.

reaking conservatives
First thing out of a conservatives' mouth is "why do you hate America?" Because we don't believe in the same asinine tactics as you does not mean we hate America. I don't think "kill them all and let god sort out the innocent" Bible fundamentalists might, but I don't.

We laid the groundwork for this religious violence. We started a war to oust Hussein while he kept a lid on religious violence , and now we can't stop it. I don't see a way to fix it. Pull our troops out until the dust settles and off aid to the survivors if they'll take it.

Dennis might be unaware of religious violence elsewhere, but he should read up on northern Ireland and some of what has been done there and abroad. It is not on the scale of Iraq, but the dead and maimed are still dead and maimed.

addendum
after "sort out the innocent" is a good plan for war.


DUDE: Could Gore have been any worse?

Loyal Dem & Penn
---has it exactly right. People of Penn's stripe actually should be sent to live in one of those caves, wear skirts, hide behind skirts, hide behind little children being blown to bits by their evil keepers and dream up other evil along with his fellow jihadists. That is, as long as he could manage to live.

Agreed that he wouldn't need a hat -- not for very long, anyway. He just doesn't get it.

Loyal Dem, Not Loyal Dem & Penn
Only Loyal Democrat has it exactly right -- about Penn.

To will
what about Mexico? Even though the following post has a grossly misleading title, it does show one case where GWB clearly has his priorities wrong. He urges the State of Texas to adhere to requirements of foreign laws rather than Texas laws.

http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/2007/03/new_claim_of_pr.html#more

This case will be interesting to see the final outcome. Does foreign law trump the US Constitution?

mike_lee
wants the 'old America back'

Which one?

The one from Waco or the one from Ruby Ridge?

To Dude3344
I hope the Supremes pull their heads out with this one but you never know. I also think it will be interesting to see what the libs think since they tend to agree with Bush on this one.

mike_lee
wants the old America back?

Which one?

The one from Somalia?
The Khobar Towers?
The first WTC attack?
The Cole?
The embassy in Tanzania?
The embassy in Kenya?

Is better when they actually kill our people than when we "talk" about killing the enemy; is that it?

Tony Blair?
Tony Blair got his derriere roasted just like Bush has.

They call him Bushes poodle.

The world does not want to do anything about oil producing countries; they just want to sign another resolution, pass the cocktails and get into their "petrol slurping lowries" to the next ball.

New Form of Evil
Actually, the newest form of evil is the liberals who effectively respond to the slaughter of multiple innocents of their own country and religion by saying, "Right on, guys! Way to go!! Take that, George Bush!"
In my military days, a basic item of radio use included this advice. "Never say on the radio, 'We are being shelled!' and particularly never say, 'artillary is landing 500 yards to our right (left, etc).'" Since the enemy could possibly listen to our communications, you would have just served as an artillary observer for him. He could adjust his fire according to your report.
The New York Times, Newsweek, et al tell the enemy, who certainly is listening carefully, what form of terror is having the greatest effect. And the more the American media reports terrorist acts as evidence of American "failure" they are saying, in effect, "Your terrorism is right on target. Fire for effect." I strongly suspect that if the American media had not been telling terrorists how effective they have been, the war would have been won two years ago.

satte
Mike_Lee wrote: I want the old America back.

Which one?

When I was 6 years old JFK died. I was let out of school early but I didn't understand the implications. I knew my Massachusetts neighborhood like the back of my hand and it was so strange to turn the corner of my block and see all the adults out in the street in little groups crying and embracing each other. I have seen my mother cry but never like that, it impacted me. The cities were hushed all night not because of a law or a curfew but because our country beat as one.

That's the America I want back.

Dude3344
Please read my whole post.

I agree with you. The Liberal argument that we ought to fight the terrorist 'only after they attack' means that we ought to take civilian casualties "just to make it fair."

In reality; they don't believe there is a threat.

They think "Islamic Terrorism" is the big lie.


Dude3344
Please read my whole post.

I agree with you. The Liberal argument that we ought to fight the terrorist 'only after they attack' means that we ought to take civilian casualties "just to make it fair."

In reality; they don't believe there is a threat.

They think "Islamic Terrorism" is the big lie.


Question?
How come nation building cannot possibly work in Iraq under any circumstances but;

It always seem logical for every Lefty foreign policy pet project?


Resolve
In 1941 FDR mobilized the country; he instituted the draft and the civil defense, he started to sell war bonds and organized the population.

He made Pearl Harbor into an American War because everyone was involved, everyone sold into the idea of defending the country

Bush said our duty was to go to the mall.

He made no attempt to separate more Joe Lieberman(s) from the Dems

He made it into a Republican war

Those showers brought us these mudslides.

Mike_lee
America cried like that when Reagan died

and in 9/11

Before you guys turned into the World Socialist Party

A nation as proud as this one filing lawsuits over election results?

Bringing the almighty power of the federal government to bear over one poor Randy Weaver.
Killing his baby, his wife and his dog with FBI snippers!

Attacking a cult in Waco with Tanks!

Please!

Democrats the main reason to vote Republican.

Regarding the article
This sucks. There are no answers. I personally didn't want us getting involved in Iraq but pulling out would clearly lead to all manner of horrors.
Pointless entry, but...this sucks. That country is hell on earth.

-
First up I'm, pro life, anti gun-control, refuse to use politically correct speech, I hate unions, And I'm not that fond of gays I got physically sick the day Clinton was elected and spent a month in depression I think income tax is a crime and I wish the government would stay out of my life. I would love to close every public school in America and fire those people and their union. That union has run our education system into the ground. Japan has private schools only and they have a great education system.

A man who can not admit mistakes is not a leader. Bush admits mistakes during speeches using scripts written by others, men apologize when they realize they screwed up. Perhaps because I lived overseas for a number of years I have a different perspective on war in Iraq. I believe until his death *Osama led Bush around by the nose and used Bush to do most of his destruction. I loved George SR I detest that loathsome egomaniac twit he sired.

SO DON'T CALL ME A LEFTY

Re Peppermint's Posts
I am touched that Peppermint doesn't like the barbarism and cruelty of the Iraqis and the Vietnamese. Just now tonight I have been reading her blog, where she treats us to her fantasy world in the form of fiction she has created (see "Juliet Smith's Diary"). It is just chock-full of liberals and Democrats being killed, bludgeoned, shot in the head, torn limb from limb, and fed to dogs.

Fun reading for all the family
A couple of choice quotes from Peppermint's "diary":

"The last time we moved, a herd of liberals descended upon us begging us to take them within our group. No one would hear of it. First we just told them to scatter like the wind and stop bothering us. After that didn’t work, I’m afraid I have to relate that we just gunned them down. Hauling their bodies off and burying them was the worst part. But, we couldn’t leave any evidence lying around. Besides, the gathering of the vultures could easily indicate where our location was and we needed to stay secure.


Back in February, Nancy Pelosi was killed by the anti-war crowd. She never lived up to her promise to end the war. She was speaking before a crowd in San Francisco when the crowd erupted into a violent scene. Members of Code Pink had been chanting, “Nan, Nan, you old dog pan” and Nan Nan the Armani suit sh*t can”. The chants got louder and louder until several members of Code Pink stormed onto the podium, attacking her, shoving her to the ground. Before anyone could do anything to help, Mrs. Pelosi was beaten into a pulp, her Armani suit unrecognizable from anyone else’s thrift shop goods.


You would think that the media would be outraged over Mrs. Pelosi’s violent death, but instead they wrote about Code Pink as heroes of our time.


with the help of the Patriots group, Joe and other prisoners stormed the commandant’s quarters and beat Webb to death. His bludgeoned body was catapulted over the prison fence and stray dogs tore it from limb to limb and ate it. The savaging of his body was only after it had cooled down. You see, part of his body hit the electrical fence and he was electrocuted. His body writhed and jumped at each shock. Goshawk and Buck said the screams were music to their ears, piercing the night like the sounds of sirens at 3am."

As Borat might say, is niiiice...

Review of WWII

.....Mike_Lee ...

.....Who do you think we were killing when we carpet bombed Toyko and Berlin? .....COLOSSUS

Review of WWII 2

....mike_lee ...

.....I remember the day of Japans unconditional surrender after the second Atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki ...people were cheering in the streets as passing cars blew their horns ...that is the America I want back .....COLOSSUS

You lost me after
Puleese, no one is going to read these long diatribes.

Yep
Yea, you're right. But normal people don't past articles like that that's the work of a zombie. Anyway threads seem to have a one day lifespan here.

The Future
JIhad, I have two items. The first is a description of how the Muslims moved into Persia.. notice the similarities to the crime they commit in Europe today.. Then after that , I show how Islam in its core teaching obligates the Muslim to do this. It's a religious obligation and an eschatological requirement. Oh and let me already state what the responses are going to be.. 1 - Taking it out of context 2 - Using a bad translation 3 - English doesnt have the same meaning as Arabic 4 - (My favorite) Billy did it too!!! (Comparing to other religions... this tactic is designed to prevent Islam from being discussed)

1 - Persian Conquest Example
"More Moslems came, and soon a small mosque was built, which attracted yet others. As long as Zoroastrians remained in the majority, their lives were tolerable; but once the Moslems became the more numerous, a petty but pervasive harassment was apt to develop. This was partly verbal, with taunts about fire-worship, and comments on how few Zoroastrians there were in the world, and how many Moslems, who must therefore posses the truth; and also on how many material advantages lay with Islam. The harassment was often also physical; boys fought, and gangs of youth waylaid and bullied individual Zoroastrians. They also diverted themselves by climbing into the local tower of silence and desecrating it, and they might even break into the fire-temple and seek to pollute or extinguish the sacred flame. Those with criminal leanings found too that a religious minority provided tempting opportunities for theft, pilfering from the open fields, and sometimes rape and arson. Those Zoroastrians who resisted all these pressures often preferred therefore in the end to sell out and move to some other place where their co-religionists were still relatively numerous, and they could live at peace; and so another village was lot to the old faith."

Boyce, A Persian Stronghold of Zoroastrianism, pp. 7-8;


2 - Islam 101

Shortly before Muhammad fled the hostility of Mecca, a new batch of Muslim converts pledged their loyalty to him on a hill outside Mecca called Aqaba. That Muhammad's nascent religion underwent a significant change at this point is plain. The scholarly Ishaq clearly intends to impress on his (Muslim) readers that, while in its early years, Islam was a relatively tolerant creed that would "endure insult and forgive the ignorant," Allah soon required Muslims "to war against all and sundry for God and his Apostle." The Islamic calendar testifies to the paramouncy of the Hijra by setting year one from the date of its occurrence. The year of the Hijra, 622 AD, is considered more significant than the year of Muhammad's birth or death or that of the first Quranic revelation because Islam is first and foremost a political-military enterprise. It was only when Muhammad left Mecca with his paramilitary band that Islam achieved its proper political-military articulation. The years of the Islamic calendar (which employs lunar months) are designated in English "AH" or "After Hijra."


Muhammad's greatest victory came in 632 AD, ten years after he and his followers had been forced to flee to Medina. In that year, he assembled a force of some ten thousand Muslims and allied tribes and descended on Mecca. "The Apostle had instructed his commanders when they entered Mecca only to fight those who resisted them, except a small number who were to be killed even if they were found beneath the curtains of the Kaba." (Sira, p550)

Volume 3, Book 29, Number 72;
Narrated Anas bin Malik: Allah's Apostle entered Mecca in the year of its Conquest wearing an Arabian helmet on his head and when the Prophet took it off, a person came and said, "Ibn Khatal is holding the covering of the Kaba (taking refuge in the Kaba)." The Prophet said, "Kill him."

Following the conquest of Mecca, Muhammad outlined the future of his religion.

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177;
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour {of the Last Judgment} will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24;
Narrated Ibn Umar: Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform that, then they save their lives and property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah."

It is from such warlike pronouncements as these that Islamic scholarship divides the world into dar al-Islam (the House of Islam, i.e., those nations who have submitted to Allah) and dar al-harb (the House of War, i.e., those who have not). It is this dispensation that the world lived under in Muhammad's time and that it lives under today. Then as now, Islam's message to the unbelieving world is the same: submit or be conquered.

The root of this carnage:
There was no car bombings or death squads before we went into Iraq. "WE" caused all this mayhem that we see on the nightly news, Yes, Saddam was a bad guy but at least he had his country under check, even if it was thru fear. The Sunni's and Shii'tes, have been enemies for generations and Saddam and those before him kept that anger in check, and here we come and open pandora's box and wonder why all the violence! well, all you have to do is look no further than George Bush's wallet to know why.

Avoid it or terminate it
This form of evil can be a compelling argument for us leaving. I am not intending it as such...yet....but it is worth considering. When confronted with such, can the good of the many outweigh the good of the few? If we assume x number of innocents die in y timeframe, can we then justify increasing our own attacks knowing we will inflict civilian casualties, but calculating they will be similar or less then those from the enemy? Can we act that logically and mathematically?
Ive no idea.

Are you serious?
82nd Airborne Div writes:
There was no car bombings or death squads before we went into Iraq. "WE" caused all this mayhem that we see on the nightly news, Yes, Saddam was a bad guy but at least he had his country under check, even if it was thru fear. The Sunni's and Shii'tes, have been enemies for generations and Saddam and those before him kept that anger in check, and here we come and open pandora's box and wonder why all the violence! well, all you have to do is look no further than George Bush's wallet to know why.

Are you honestly serious?

Perhaps you could read this article and then compare the estimates of saddam killings, with the killings going on now?

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=5773

It is apparent to me you do not care about human rights and saving innocents, but rather, you seem to have an intest hatred for Bush. Saying Saddam kept the country in check is laughable.

hello
The link you gave was 4 years old, worthless at this point I think. The people of Iraq are dying at a rate of 560 per day (all deaths) That's about two and a half times the rate of death under Saddam. The problem is the young male segment makes up most of those deaths, not elderly people. This could produce a severe shortage of husbands in the next few years.

more
BTW even if the link was up to date you do realize that's state department propaganda right? Propaganda is published in this war just like every war. They are designed to look authentic and show up in newspapers or TV news

Who woulda thunk that?
"But intellectually honest opponents of the war have to acknowledge that no one could anticipate an "insurgency" that included people leaving children in a car and then blowing them up."

You go with that, Mr.Prager.
Iraqis exhibited all manner of civil behavior before the invasion, right?
Members of the Iraqi ruling class and the military (somewhat redundant) were incredibly kind and respectful of their fellow countrymen. So kind in fact, they were hesitant when it came time to gas them. Who would have thought a single barbarian called Iraq home?
The parallels between Japan, Germany, and Iraq are so abundant, I can understand why you elected not to list a single one.
Yes, Mr. Prager.
Who woulda thunk sticking our hand in a socket would produce a shock?
Certainly not the anyone in the White House.

worse than that...
Prager is smarter than he sounds on the radio. I agree this is a new form of evil and unfortunately it has produced another. The Iraqi Police shed their uniforms at night and avenge the deaths of their loved ones with the weapons we provide and the intelligence we gather and share with them.

Reciprocity
Every American knows about the 444 days Carter allowed our Diplomats to remain as hostages and how Reagan ‘turned it around’ just by getting elected.

But that is not the whole story.

When Carter was President a foreign government that should remain nameless had such contempt for the power of the United States that the first Secretary of the United States embassy was badly beaten in the bathroom of a major hotel in the capital of such state.

Said Secretary had embarrassed the host country by defying the local political police and visiting the home of dissidents under home arrest.

The attackers of the American diplomat not only did not take anything of value after the attack but, they showed a command of martial arts strange among common criminals.

Then came Reagan

The new first Secretary a former USMC Colonel from Montana, visited the Foreign Minister of the host country and informed of the new policy of “reciprocity” under Reagan.

Meaning; if he –the American Diplomat- was not allowed to visit dissidents in the home country any diplomat from that country meeting with American Communist will be declared ‘not welcomed’ and asked to leave the US.

The American First Secretary then asked the Foreign minister to guarantee the security of every member of the American diplomatic mission, explaining that ‘reciprocity’ and ‘mutual respect’ will extend to every facet of the mission; including security.

Is anyone surprised that the Americans did not experience any further physical attacks during the whole difficult and, at times, confrontational Reagan period?

Americans have absolutely forgotten ‘reciprocity’ and ‘mutual respect.’

Americans foreign policy failures have less to do with our executive being Republican or, Democrat and more to do with the US failure to demand equity and reciprocity in every international transaction.

One example?

Why is it that the house of Saud is able to spend millions spreading their Whahabi ideology when in Saudi Arabia you can’t even posses a Bible?

Wouldn’t be fair to ask them to either allow for even one Christian church to be open in Ryhad before we allow one more Whahabi mosque to be built stateside?

Let’s see what society, of the two, is able to withstand full openness.




Matt1234:
The article you had me read was pure Propaganda from our government, please don't send me to sites that you yourselve know was written buy the very people that want you and me to believe that we are 'JUST' in our cause because we are not. We started the carnage over there and it will not end any time soon.

Al Qaeda orders to Jihadists
Go to the blogs and act like Democrats

THE MIDDLE EAST MEDIA RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Special Dispatch Series - No. 1508
March 20, 2007 No.1508


Islamist Website Instructs Mujahideen in Using Popular U.S. Web Forums to Foster Anti-War Sentiment among Americans

In the past few months, Islamists engaged in "media jihad" have increased their efforts to expose as broad a Western audience as possible to their jihad films, which purport to document the growing success of the mujahideen in Iraq and Afghanistan. As part of this endeavor, they have posted jihad films on popular free video-sharing websites such as YouTube, LiveLeak, and Google Video, hoping that such films will tip public opinion in the West against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan - thus pressuring Western governments to withdraw their troops from these countries.

As part of the campaign to foster anti-war sentiment among Westerners, and more specifically among Americans, a member of the Al-Mohajroon Islamist website with the username Al-Wathiq Billah instructed mujahideen in how to infiltrate popular American forums and to use them to distribute jihad films and spread disinformation about the war.

The following are excerpts:

"Raiding American Forums is Among the Most Important Means of Obtaining Victory in the Fierce Media War... and of Influencing the Views of the Weak-Minded American"

"There is no doubt, my brothers, that raiding American forums is among the most important means of obtaining victory in the fierce media war... and of influencing the views of the weak-minded American who pays his taxes so they will go to the infidel American army. This American is an idiot and does not know where Iraq is... mandatory for every electronic mujahid ."

"It is better that you raid non-political forums such as music forums and trivia forums... which American people... favor... Define your target... and get to know it well... Post your contribution and do not get into... futile arguments..."

Indicate You Are an American

"Obviously, you have to register yourself using a purely American name... Choose an icon that indicates that you are an American, and place it next to your nickname ."

"In my experience, the areas most visited in American forums... 'Random Thoughts' and 'What's going on in your mind?'... takes priority in the American forums, and is highly popular. You should post your contribution there... This should include films of the mujahideen in Iraq, mujahideen publications in English, and images and films of the Americans' crimes, killing unarmed civilians in Iraq... etc."

"Invent Stories About American Soldiers You Have Personally Known"

"Obviously, you should post your contribution... as an American... You should correspond with visitors to this forum, the frustrating situation of their troops in Iraq... You should invent stories about American soldiers you have personally known (as classmates... or members in a club who played baseball and tennis with you) who were drafted to Iraq and then committed suicide while in service by hanging or shooting themselves..."

"Also, write using a sad tone, and tell them that you feel sorry for your neighbor or co-worker who became addicted to alcohol or drugs... because her poor fiancé, a former soldier in Iraq, was paralyzed or his legs were amputated... which will break their spirits, oh brave fighter for the sake of God..."

How to Make Americans Feel Frustrated With Their Government

"You should enter into debate or respond only if it is extremely necessary... Your concern should be introducing topics which... will cause frustration and anger towards their government..., which will... render them hostile to Bush... and his Republican Party and make them feel they must vote ton bring the troops back from Iraq as soon as possible."

"Do not... discuss issues pertaining to Arabs or Muslims at all, whether negatively or positively... because this could be a trap for you... In addition, do not ask people to circulate the material in other forums... as these types of requests will expose you..."

HaHa what a crock
"That was clearly written by a Republican, what say Dr. Watson"
"Quite!"

People willing and wanting to die....
I think Dennis is on to something -- this is a unique form of warfare. In past conflicts, combatants have always taken risks. Yes, they were WILLING do die, but they rarely WANTED to die. (The Japanese were an exception, but that was when WWII was lost.) Now, you have people who are not only WILLING to die, but the WANT to die too. This cancer has its roots in Arab nationalism and is spreading. If anyone thinks that we can cure it by leaving Iraq, then I have two towers to sell.

Peppermint
I read your story. It sounds a bit like fascism to me. If that is what people want, just wait, it may very well be coming. I think however, we will be the ones being hunted.

We have sat here and some have even cheered as totalitarian legislation has been passed and enacted. Don't be surprised when shock upon shock, they actually start using it.

Insurgents worthy of honor:
The insurgents are only doing what insurgents have done for thousands of years and that is to create havoc among the traitors and the occupiers, these are only arab nationals that see us as a foreign force that is in their land and they want to kill as many of us as possibly, they know they can't beat us openly, so the only card they have is to inflict injury and death among as many of us as they can, they don't need to win, they just need to show their brothers and sister's that they can cause us misery and pain, they can drag this out for years to come.
So even if we are in Iraq 5-10-15yrs from now, the insurgents will be also and they will be showing their brothers and sisters that they still can inflict injury and death upon our soldiers.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.