Feb 21 2007
Fly By 02/21/07
Quick and to the point this morning. Libby will be acquitted in a very short deliberation.
OK, with that out of the way, let’s turn to John Edward’s continued spiral down the toilet. First he hires, fires, rehires and refires (for – against, for – against, perfect Kerry running mate) liberal bloggers who had no business trying to represent the mainstream of America they regularly insulted like high school gossips talk about their opponents. Now he is out to diss the Jewish base of the democrat party, calling Isreal the greatest threat against world peace. I guess a nuclear armed Islamo Fascist insane asylum which pretends the holocaust never happened and openly claims the end of Isreal is near is not enough of a threat for Edwards. One wonders how he plans to deal with African Americans and ‘Sister Soldjah’ them?
The southern section of Iraq is nearly as peaceful as the Kurdish areas of Iraq, so the UK is drawing down forces in the process of handover to the Iraqis. It will be measured and tested and assured a successful outcome. Of course the media is claiming this is a surrender and should be a model for a US pullout. Fine, when Iraq is as peaceful as the Shia southern regions under British control we should strongly consider pulling our forces out – but not before then. There, the is now debate over. Dems, deal with it.
On the same note, Dick Cheney torpedoes the Democrats by demanding the US withdrawl from Iraq “with honor” (i.e., because of success). Which means the dems want to leave Iraq with dishonor. Hard to argue that point. Something must be showing up in the polls. The Dems tried to surrender too early, too hard. He and Bush are showing amazing confidence in our troops – and that is a serious political price to pay for the Dems to oppose that confidence.
It seems our enemies in war will not be treated with civil legal protections after all (as if they ever have been in our entire history). A federal appeals court has decided those who attack our laws with violent force from outside our country cannot then run and try to receive protection from the very laws they wish to destroy. Duh! War is the absence of law requiring abnormal actions not normally legal.
And a leading Russian claims Berezovsky killed Litvinenko with Po-210. Wonder why he is saying that now? (Possibly more on this later).
Hope everyone has a great day!
Sooth
You quote Vietnam kill rates to compare to this war and then want to twaddle on like you are some Greek philosopher.
Me thinks you make too much of yourself and you don’t have any where near the heft to carry the load.
lassoing:
Oh Puhleaze, the numbers of British leaving are going to be about 1,000 by the end of summer. That is not that big a deal.
BTW, I know you are a bigot and all Iraqis look alike to you but not everyone in southern Iraq is a Sadrist. In fact most of the Shia in the region are far more secular than you give them credit for. And the violence is nothing like it is in Baghdad or Anbar province. I keep hearing that violence or the lack thereof is the standard by which we are to base success, so it seems that there is not a need for a lot of soldiers in Basrah right now.
Besides, I keep hearing from the left that the righties are making the Shia in Iran scarier than they really are because the big bad Republicans want to bomb the innocent mullahs. make up your minds, assuming you have a mind.
Better re-read the MCA language, Dennisa. In the fine print it arguably allows Georgie (or whoever succeeds him to the Oval Office) to classify American citizens and deprive them of their habeas rights:
So, you see, you or AJ, once pronounced an enemy combatant by Hillary, you would have NO RECOURSE to the court system to prove that you WERE a citizen.
Terrye
You consistently expose your ignorance on the Iraq War with almost every post.
First, the Shias are split between several militia groupings other than al Sadr , and your inference to the contrary shows you’re still
at Iraq 101. Second, why if “most of the Shia are secular” in the South, have they “allowed” strict Shariah Law to be imposed?
And the relative abscence of violence (mostly internecine
among Shia militias) is due to the Brits’ detached ceding of the
area. Brit officers are on record as decrying the comparative US
brutal methodology in dealing with Iraqis in areas it runs.
Finally Bush is transparently trying to blame Iran for his Iraq failure,by empahizing a purported Iranian arming which is not true,but even if it were, pales before the Saudi/Jordanian etc
Sunni arming of the insurgency. Let’s hope it’s only
sabre-fidgeting on Bush’s part because Iran has many answers
for hypothetical Bush thrusts against it, and the answers include
blood of American soldiers.
When the Supreme Court rules that the Guantanamo inmates are entitled to Habeas Corpus rights, I’ll believe it.
Sooth
Are you stretching for a slot on the all new and improved air america?
Lass
You really need to get a clue. They are cheap.
Sooth,
” thoroughly discredited Domino Theory” – An axiom of the Left.
” that we would have WON – whatever that means – if we had only stayred there another 10 years and killed another 58,000 troops” –
We won militarily.
lassoing:
My ignorance? That is a joke. You are an example of how the internet makes people stupid.
Most of the Shia do not support any militia. And of course there is more than one militia, there is for instance the Bahdi militia which is associated with Hakim. However, most Iraqis are not supportive of the militias in general or for that matter the Sunni insurgency. I would suspect a big reason for that is that the Iraqi people are usually the victims. Two thirds of the population wants nothing to do with the militias, the Baathists, AlQaida or the gangs.
And the British are on record saying no such thing. Oh, I don’t doubt that you can cherry pick some propaganda…but that is a far cry from the British being on record complaining about Americans as a matter of course. Most of the people complaining about Americans are people like you who either treat American soldiers like victims or victimizers whichever works. And ofcourse you will jump on any criticism as justification for your own prejudices.
The truth is it will take a long time to make Iraq whole, it has suffered much and if you have your way it will suffer a lot more.
And they have not instituted strict Sharia in all the south. There is a constitution in Iraq and while it is true that in some areas the likes of Sadr have tried to institute Sharia, they have not succeeded in replacing secular law. In fact one of the reasons the mayor of Najaf welcomed American forces a couple of years to run out Sadr was because the Sadrists were trying to do just that and the people who live there tend to be followers of Sistani and he is very spiritual but is more inclined to secular law. But to say that all of the south is under Sharia is just plain wrong.
And lastly, Bush is just stating the obvious in regards to Iran. This is what Democrats always do.
For years we have been hearing about the dangerous Iranians and their meddling in places like Lebanon and their hatred of the US. No one doubted it. Now all of a sudden since the man in the White House is a Republican we are going to ignore and disavow the last thirty years and pretend Iran is an innocent little lamb.
Someone tell Hillary, she is still under the impression we can not let them get the bomb, apparently she has not got the memo that they are victims not villains.
So you have decided that Bush is lying. And I guess the Brits are too because they say the Iranian weapons have killed their troops. I guess that what a Brit says only counts if he is complaining about how mean a Yank is.
And I guess the battle field commanders who are picking up these people and their weapons are part of the plot and of course Gates the new Secretary of Defence is a part of the conspiracy too.
It is amazing that he gets the job with overwhelming support from Democrats just so he can be called a liar a couple of months later.
Well, if that is true, when are the hearings to have him removed from office? Surely he will have to be tried if he is indeed lying to the Senate just so he can help Bush invade poor sad innocent little Iran.
And of course the same goes for the new commanders who were just put in charge with the consent of Congress and who also say the Iranians are killing our troops, they too must be court martialed at the very least. Or perhaps you and your friends are just shooting off your mouths. And of course you and your kind have evidence of this scheme beyond Bush lied because we said so…right?
The truth is you hate Bush and if he said day was light and night was dark you would argue the point. The truth be damned.
So don’t tell me I am uninformed. You are not only uninformed you are wilfully ignorant.
The amazing thing is if Saddam Hussein were in power he could wipe half his population off the face of the earth and people like you would not lift a finger to help those people. They are not even real to you.
Sooth & Lass,
Can you tell us any version of totalitarianism that you can’t defend?
Macker, just curious — are you the same Macker that used to comment at Blogs for Bush?
http://www.juancole.com/2007/02/blair-to-draw-down-british-troops-tony.html
Yes Terrye you are a joke. Juan Cole tells why the Brits are leaving here. So the Shias want to get slaughtered by the Sunni insurgents?
The militias are what keeps that from happening. And the
“secular law” of Sistani is a form of Shariah Law. Back to Iraq
101. Many key UK officers have criticised the entire US
methodology of dealing with the Iraqi citizenry including home invasions, trigger-happy crossing guards and worse. Some US
officers have admitted the approach has not worked.
If the Iranians are “meddlers ” in a bordering country, what
does that make the American occupiers, which 60% of the
Iraqis are in favor of shooting?
Retired Spook ,
No, Just on Drummond’s Stolen Thunder, then here. I’ve heard that Terry McCauliff used a similar name though. Ugh.
Juan Cole?
The more I read about lasso, the more I understand what you are getting your sources. Juan Cole is most definitely not to be trusted as a credible source of Iraq and Iran. Don’t believe Juan Cole.
Lass
We got it now you are the man and every one else is in the can.
How can we do otherwise but succumb to your superior wisdom?
Spread your wings and fly little bumblebee.
Oh, yes the Brits are poodling out because they “won.” Which Bush would be wise to do …yesterday; declare victory and get out. Because when the US finally leaves, there won’t be a-n-y doubt.
Cole has been right about the unwinnability and deterioration of the war since early 2004. But keep looking for a Kennedyesque scapegoat for a “neo-con” botch. Won’t do you any more good
than blaming the left for the no-win Vietnam War.
Of course you could save a vestige of conservative reputation by
supporting Ron Paul and quoting Chuck Hagel.
Brits who don’t hate America is trying to combat Anti-Americanism.
Take a look at What American Needs to Know about Jihad
Plus what’s going on in UK:
UK: Schools ‘should accommodate Muslim needs’
Have you read what the Muslims are forcing the UK Hospitals to capitulate to their “needs”?
MerlinOS2, you’re absolutely right about them. Shall we capitulate to them?
Chuck Hagel? He doesn’t have my vote.
I consider Ron Paul too much of a whacko.
This is the party that you support:
Free Trade Hits A Rough Patch “Death of Free Trade”.