Nov 25 2006
Democrats Face Test In Iraq
The terrorists and insurgents are acting as I and many predicted, they are becoming much more violent as they try to make sure the Democrats make good on their promise and surrender Iraq to Al Qaeda. The problem for the terrorists and insurgents is the American people will not accept handing Iraq over to the Islamo Fascists. The Democrats claimed our departure would force the Iraq government to stand up to their task (as if they weren’t doing so???). So here is the result of Democrat promises to date on Iraq – bloodsher and disorder as the terrorists plan for the Democrats to fulfill both the dreams of liberals and terrrorists allike:
The Bush administration charged yesterday that the escalating violence in Iraq committed by both Shiites and Sunnis over the past two days is a “brazen effort” to bring down the fragile government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
The White House also said President Bush has no intention of backing out of talks next week with the Iraqi leader, despite threats yesterday from a powerful Shiite militia to pull out of the government if Maliki goes ahead with the meeting. The talks, set for Thursday in Amman, Jordan, have suddenly taken on the air of a crisis summit, as Iraq slides closer to all-out civil war.
The Democrats never said they would pull out so the country COULD devolve into bloody civil war and the democratically elected government would be overthrown. There was no election promise to accelerate the fall of Iraq. The truth is the current hope for US surrender can be and should be laid at the feet of the Democrats here in the US who gave the world the impression they would run from the Islamo-Fascists if elected. Sadly there are enough ignorant people across the world who actually believed the Democrats. Or at least believed they had the power and will to force a surrender on Bush. But the Democrats have neither will, nor power nor intentions of surrendering. They made things worse and now they will be held accountable.
As unfair as it seems, the current situation is now owned by Bush and the Democrats. They have sufficient political power right now to start to form the debate and set the expectations. They are doing nothing. They are like deer in the headlights. They won, and as predicted, they have no clue what to do right now.
Bush is right, as is Maliki. If we show no sign of folding (got that Dems – no sign, as in unified front, as in one American policy, as in standing shoulder to shoulder with our men and women in harms way, were politics should end at the shoreline of our country) then the Iraqis will hold firm. They will only crumble if the US is sure to depart. Al Qaeda is on the verge of losing its fantasy Capitol City of their Modern Caliphate – Ramadi, Iraq. And they hope and optimism now flowing through the insurgents can be squashed easily by Democrats coming out and standing firm that they will not allow Iraq’s democracy to fail from a simple lack of will. Yes, if things blow out of control that is one thing. But simply having to stand up and say “we will support the democratically elected government of Iraq as it gains control of the entire nation” is not a huge price to pay to actually crush the Islamo Fascist movement. Is it Dems? You won’t even have to institute a draft to be seen as taking a winning position. These are just words, I am sure Dems can find the stamina to get past the gag-reflex and spit them out with some modicum of conviction. One thing dems are good at is spitting out words with faux conviction!
One other thing to keep in mind with all great wars – the fighting and dying hit a fevered pitch right when the pivotal test of wills is occurring. As with WW II and the Battle of The Bulge, which was Hitler’s last gasp, the death tolls during these periods can be the most intense of the entire war (see my previous post here). This has been true throughout time – from the Battle at Antietem in the civil war to the Road To Iraq in Gulf War I (where there was a massive killing of the Iraqi’s as they feld Kuwait) there fighting hits a fevered pitch right at the point the final outcome is decided. If we are at that point we simply need to stand firm and behind the less than one year old Maliki government. And if the Maliki government survives this test, it will be stable for quite some time to come. The press and the left is simply panicking (or some who are rejoicing in the bloodshed). Don’t mind them, they never grasped the situation and understood how to succeed.
Update: Something to consider from Pierre Legrand concerning the common threat we all face and how to understand what it represents. And it represents this question: Is America still ascending through history – or are we declining?
The problem with Americans today is that they want wars to end like they do in the movies – the shooting stops – and everyone joins hands and sings songs of peace. That has never happened in any war. The Nazis did not go peacefully into the night after WWII and millions died after we left Vietnam.
There has always been the cut and run Democrats since the days of the civil war to the present. They were never successful until the mass media helped them in Vietnam – and maybe they will do it again – who knows.
And there were always insurgencies afte the battles stopped – though they never did have msm support like they do now. Historical point from our own histroy. You may remember the insurgents in the south after the civil war in this country. They were thought of as the terrorist wing of the Democrats that had lost all political power in the south. They covered their faces, had holy rituals and brutalized and terrorized the country – killing anyone who disagreed with them. Anyone remember the KKK? The Civil war did not end like it did in Gone With the Wind – between carpetbaggers and the KKK the fighting continued for years after Lee surrendered.
Jacqui, good comments. One small point, the KKK started in Indiana, not in the south, but I get the point. I think some of the Japanese fought until sometime in the ’60s
Another story.
Very interesting. I went over to Kos and they had a story about the Long War, for the WaPo. Same one I discussed above.
I basically said the same thing there, pointing out that the WaPo was wrong as usual, but that was the looney left’s newspaper and they wanted to believe it. Didn’t matter if it was right or not. They took my comment off the blog. Can you believe that. The Freedom of Speech dems don’t care about the truth. As near as I can tell, it was either they disagreed about dates or that I said “looney left”. I didn’t make any reference to the host of the blog, so I certainly didn’t insult him.
I do know that the site is full of vulgarities, I used none, but you should see the names they refer to Pres. Bush by.
Funny, I just read that they didn’t think a person could get banned on Kos, anything went. Guess not if it tells the truth. They’ll have no part of that.
Jacqui, whoops, seems my memory is bad, so I went and checked and google seems to agree with you that the KKK started in Tenn. in 1865, I guess I was remembering it’s “rebirth” later in Indiana.
Last activity I heard of was Sen Byrd was a member in West Va.
Sorry I questioned you.
FE, the saying you were searching for earlier in the comments is:
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt
One of my all time favorite sayings to describe people like Ken, heh.
Thanks Spook
SDModerate, I also take issue with this being Bush’s war. I seem to remember some 17 UN resolutions defied by Saddam Hussein which led a Coalition of over fifty countries to overthrow him. I also believed this moved was approved by our own senate. If only they had done this to Hitler in 1939, we may have avoided the worst war in world history. This time, the world saw a madman out of control and took him out. It was and still is the right thing to do. As for blaming the democrats, I will say this. As soon as it became politically advantageous for the Dems to do it, they started pushing for the war to be over now, now, now. Like little children, they don’t really believe war is ever neccessary, they only go along with it when they are heavily outweighed by public opinion. Sometimes wars have to be fought, and this one had to be fought. As soon as they could get away with it, they started churning up doubts among the people, “Bush lied us into war”, “It was all about oil”, “We can never win”. They used the war to cause doubts and hamstring the presdent for their own political purposes. It was easy to do in America because we are the, “I want it NOW society”. We have no patience for anything anymore. I see Tim Russert right now asking that sam question over and over again, When will we get out?, how many troops will be there a year from now? The only honest answer to these questions are, NOBODY KNOWS!!!! Nobody can ever predict the duration or outcome of a war. But Russert, who is nothing more than a shill for the Dems, will ask this question only to use the video of the answer against the person who is stupid enough to make predictions when the prediction falls flat. He is doing this on purpose. He is only doing this to do damage to these politicians, usually conservatives.
While the democrate bemoaned the great loss of life, the casualties in the war have been extremely low. So far we have had less than three thousand deaths. While that is tragic, it is a miniscule fatality rate compared to WWI, where there were over 50,000 lost in one day in several battles, or even in Vietnam, where our casualty rate was about ten times what it is now. I seem to remember the democrats saying that there would be over ten-thousand US dead in the first three weeks! Remember that? C’mon now, from the very beginning, they were the voice of pessimism and still are. Now there mission is to cut and run and blame the loss on Bush, and that is what they will try to do. I don’t know if they have enough votes to succeed yet, but they will try.
Jaqui, I couldn’t agree more. One thing I would like to point out to you and Lurker9876 is that there were these same holdouts and insurgents in Japan and Germany after WWII. Also, after we folded to the gutless left and gave up in Vietnam, Vietnam folded after our cowardly congress pulled financial support from the South Vietnamese govt. Anybody remember the famous Vietnamese Boat people? The communists were slaughtering people by the bushel in South Vietnam and many took to the seas in boats. I was there in the South China Sea picking up people out of small bloody bullet ridden boats. The only thing these people ever wanted was to be free, instead they had to run for their lives after we balked.
If we leave Iraq before Saddam is dead, he may be back. And if he is, Iraq will look like Cambodia with Pol Pot. Of course that will also be Bushe fault.
Ken, Are you denying that you want American, “Barbarian” Americans to suffer casualties. If that is so, it would truly be refreshing. I have read many of your posts and the two striking things I noticed is that you never have anything positive to say about America, its intentions or it’s president. On the other hand, you never have anything negative or condemning to say about any tyrant or terrorist organization. You seem to assign the same level of goodwill or evil intentions to both. I call this gray thinking. It is typical of liberals, if not defining. There is a such thing as good and evil and right and wrong. If you, (or anyone else), thinks that George Bush is the kind of person that would have a live human being thrown into a recycling grinder, like Saddam Hussein, then you have lost touch with reality. George Bush is not that kind of man. If you equate what went on at Abu Gharib as the same thing that went on there before we took it over, then you are ignorant of the facts. People were chopped to pieces and fed to animals. They were tortured, (in the real sense of the word) in ways that would have made Vlad the Impaler proud. While I would agree that the behaviour there was wrong and was rightly punished, and some was more severe than others, there is a matter of scale here. If someone threatens to take pictures of me with underwear on my head, I say, “Ladies size 6 please”. Oh, the horror!
Ken, you’re theme is the same all the time, “America was wrong, Bush is wrong. America deserves to be taken down a peg.”
You know what Ken, I think America, with all of it’s warts, is still the best thing to happen to this planet in history! We have thrived because of our desire to let people live free and make choices in their own lives, morally, financially, religiously, and otherwise. We have helped more people to achieve their own freedom not because we got any benefit out of it but because it was a good, just thing to do. We know that if every nation in the world were as free as us, we would see very little war or famine or massive slaughter of defensless people. You know what causes wars Ken? Madmen and tyrants who take 99 percent of a countries wealth and power for themselves and need a bogeyman to blame the countries ills on. Prosperous countries are always great targets. Isreal, US, and Europe are usually condemned by the wackos as evil. People who have little or no connection to the outside world can be easily swayed against us.
But becuase we are so prosperous and strong militarily, it falls on us to be a big brother to the world, whether we want to or not. Who else can a small poor nation look to for help? The United Nations? The UN has become nothing but a club of dictators using the organization to cover their tracks.
Ken, your posts are usually anti-American. Why don’t you own that? You have every right to your opinion and you should stand behind what you believe. If you think this country is wrong, defend it with some specifics and not campaign style rhetoric. But don’t cry foul when someone repeats your words. I don’t think they were that far out of context because I have read many of your posts and that one line fits neatly into what you apparantly believe. I think the truth here is that when many libs who constantly hammer America get their own words read back to them, it doesn’t sound good even to them.
Ken definitely is one of those liberals who are joyous at American deaths and defeats. He can’t help himself. It is the only thing that can address is severe insecurity – his pleasure in the failure of those he fears.
Strata
Your site, you get the honors–your severe insecurity has run rampant for years, fearing an armyless navyless airforceless
group of jihadists, amounting to 3.8% of the Iraqi insurgents,
can somehow conquer American and force you to “get religion”
which you have admitted you no longer have (apart from your
aberrant Bush-worship.) A twelve-step is recommended.
Now for the ersatz imitators of AJ:
For Enforcement-I said the Iraqis could do a better job, quicker,
of restoring order than we could. better keep re-checking your KKK
info, typical of your errors.
For Enforcement #2
“Just look at NYT the other pillar. Today I read info about Rumsfield approving harsh interrogations and they get this from a “classified†report. There they go releasing classified info again. Is there no end these damn treasonous Dems won’t go to illustrate their hatred of America. ”
Rumsfeld comes closer to the enemy-making traitor if he approved of any method of interrogation outside international standards.
You should thank the media for nipping it in the bud.
Bikerken
“Also, after we folded to the gutless left and gave up in Vietnam, Vietnam folded after our cowardly congress pulled financial support from the South Vietnamese govt. ”
You have a mythological reading of Vietnam. America would still be there propping up an unpopular government if it had stayed.
The losses would be in the hundreds of thousands. In other
words, because this would never have been allowed by the
public, (let alone the “left”) the war was hopeless–just as Iraq
is hopeless.
What I said to For Enforcement of Evil was,to the degree his amoral
attitude reflected that of the American (let ’em kill
each other, I don’t care, but don’t withdraw) strategy is the degree
that US losses would be justified,as under the humane rules of
Geneva, the occupier is responsible for stopping the killing.
“But becuase we are so prosperous and strong militarily, it falls on us to be a big brother to the world, whether we want to or not.”
This is the opposite of the Founders’ intent, enveloped in the Monroe
Doctrine and in Washington’s Farewell Address.Our sphere of influence is this hemisphere,period, and in staving off any possible threats from the Orient. Any European, Middle East intervention is against the principals this country was founded on. And for you to naievely believe Moslem indignation at our meddlin in their part of the world isn’t the driving force for their defensive “aggression”
is just that-naeivete.
But since you are for helping poor nations, why did you ignore helping the Palestinians GET their nation (back?) As Jordan’s
Abdullah warned today on Stefanapolous, America must reign Israel
in to restore good will in the Middle East. That means force them to relinquish the Golan, Samaria and thew West Bank.
Since we have funded their dispossession, I say we do that on our way
out.
And let’s not forget Mr. Friedman’s (of the New Yawk Times)comments regarding Iraq –
The terrorists needed to have their fantasy busted; they needed to see that America had the will and ability to fight for that which America believed in, as well…hence we needed to show the terrorists that we “were not going to take it any more”…one specific terrorist being Saddam Hussein….who loved the enemy of his enemy….
after fourteen resolutions…
And answer this: how strong would the chances be for democracy to build in the Middle East and for us to disarm Libya…among many other things…if Saddam were STILL IN POWER? Where would the terrorists be holding up today after their defeat in Afganistan…ya think in Iraq????
It is truly sad that many cannot see the bigger picture of the Bush doctrine…but *many* can see it ….thank Heavens.
The fight for western civilization continues…no thanks to liberals dysfunctionates with all their neuroses…and love of George Soros.
Ken,
You write somewhat intelligently, so I’m assuming you’re just going way overboard to make a point. In any event, I wish you would stick to a single topic. I, for one, enjoy the use of other historical events and conflicts as analogies for our present situation, but when history is evoked, then butchered, it’s terribly distracting. I thought (ever so briefly) of taking your post line by line, and demonstrating the multiplicity of errors therein. Given your general approach to posting (i.e. throwing out tons and tons of crap to overwhelm others), though, I don’t think that would get anywhere. Instead, I’ll try to help you focus a little.
I came to understand you a little better in a previous thread. Perhaps you can help me again: do you think that, in the Islamic World, there are nations, organizations, actors, etc., with broad political ambitions (i.e. beyond their own national boundaries)? Put another way: do you think that the expulsion of U.S. from the Middle East and Israel from the occupied territories is their ultimate aim?
Cochino
The US was put on notice in the 1970s with the oil embargo:
become energy self-sufficient. Big oil refused to take heed.
Nevertheless, the day preceding the Gulf War two of three
energy experts said it didn’t matter whether Saddam stayed
in Kuwait or not, market forces dictated an approximately
similar price of oil to Americans.
Which is to say, it doesn’t matter whether there are such
nations, organizations or actors. America should become
energy self-sufficient and let Israel protect itself if it can,
abolishing all aid to this albatross (and to Egypt whom we
temporarily purchased with dollars.)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/22/AR2006112201536.html
for a conservative yet proportionate view on al Qaeda,
look to Michael Scheuer before you look to Strata.
Cochino, hate to break this to you, but you were had by Ken. The purpose of him throwing up all that crap is to give the impression of intelligence. Unfortunately, everyone on this blog consistently prove that he is 100% wrong 100% of the time to the point that ‘if’ he says it, you don’t even have to look it up to know he’s wrong. He’s certifiable.
I could give you dozens of examples, but here’s one. He stated unequivocally that the British Empire crumbled under Churchill. I challenged him numerous times and to date he hasn’t named even one country that left the empire under Churchill.
To show you where his sympathies lie, here is a quote of Ken’s: “in why the US Empire deserves to suffer heavy losses, military and political, in the Middle Eastâ€
He clearly states that he is for heavy US military losses in the middle east. How much more clearly could he state his sympathies.
Why the US doesn’t get self sufficient in energy. One word. Democrats. No oil drilling in North America, no Nuke plants. No windmills in Teddy Kennedy’s site. All at the insistence of the looney left, of which Ken is a charter member, and leader of the Hate America section.
So Cochino, don’t be deceived any longer.
Ken,
I asked for focus, but that first paragraph was totally incoherent. The second part was a little better, but you didn’t answer the question. Do you think such political forces exist or not? Surely, you must be able to answer that question.
http://www.dahrjamailiraq.com/hard_news/archives/iraq/000500.php#more
first, let’s be clear -under the Baathist regime, health care was better in the decayed Iraq than it is now and people are missing it. This a corrective to Strata’s misjudgements.
Cochino, For Enforcement should have been banned long ago because he uses a vocabulary all his own–he cannot for example name ONE conservative who opposed the war, because in his world
only leftists opposed it. And he believes his immorality of not caring if Iraqis slaughter each other because the US has failed its Geneva obligations is superior morality…only complaining when he is called on it.
Of course there are forces which want to drive America out of
the Middle East just as there would be forces on this continent
which wishes to extinguish any occupiers of military bases
habitated by Iran, Syria or Pakistan for example. So what?
Ken,
Are you purposely being obtuse? Why won’t you answer the question? Do you think that the expulsion of the U.S. from the Middle East and Israel from the occupied territories is their ultimate aim? I’m trying to help you to make a clear point. Or do you like going around and around with the people on this site?