Liberal dinosaur opens mouth, emits squeak
by The Panda Man · 10/03/2005 8:07 pmThe conservative thinker’s favorite commentator, Andy Rooney, has done it again. Weighing in on the war in Iraq, Rooney revives the specter of the military-industrial complex as described by Eisenhower to criticize our nation’s current mission in the Middle East.
Mr. Rooney begins:
I’m not really clear how much a billion dollars is…
That would be one thousand million, Mr. Rooney. A large figure, for sure, but of course Mr. Rooney is just getting started.
…but the United States — our United States — is spending $5.6 billion a month fighting this war in Iraq that we never should have gotten into. Almost 2,000 Americans have died there. For what?
Mr. Rooney is certainly entitled to believe that we should not have gone into Iraq, but to question what those who have given their lives have died for seems rather ignorant. They died so that Saddam Hussein would no longer threaten, kill, torture, murder, maim, and rape. They died so that free Iraqis could have a say in their own future, posing no threat to their neighbors or the United States. They died to show the world that America would not tolerate terrorism. They have not died in vain.
Mr. Rooney has more to say though:
Another way the government is planning to pay for the war and the hurricane damage is by cutting spending for things like Medicare prescriptions, highway construction, farm payments, AMTRAK, National Public Radio and loans to graduate students. Do these sound like the things you’d like to cut back on to pay for Iraq?
Yes, Mr. Rooney they do. In fact, conservatives would like to see the federal government get smaller on many fronts. This may come as a shock, but there are people who disagree with your political beliefs. Not bothering with opposing views, however, Mr. Rooney goes on to cite some numbers:
No other Country spends the kind of money we spend on our military. Last year Japan spent $42 billion. Italy spent $28 billion, Russia spent only $19 billion. The United States spent $455 billion.
Are those other nations “superpowers” Mr. Rooney? Also, that $455 billion does not sound like too much when you look at the entire $2.6 trillion federal budget. Especially when you consider that most of those trillions are funding your above-mentioned prescriptions, farm payments, NPR, Amtrak, and plenty of other social spending. Not stopping to ponder the numbers, Rooney goes on to criticize the amount of weaponry we possess:
We have 8,000 tanks for example. One Abrams tank costs 150 times as much as a Ford station wagon.
Presumably Mr. Rooney would prefer that our soldiers in Iraq pursued terrorists with cheap and plentiful Ford station wagons rather than expensive armored vehicles. Of course, Mr. Rooney would then be free to chastise Donald Rumsfeld for failing to armor those station wagons against RPG or roadside bomb attack.
Finally, Mr. Rooney invokes the ghost of Eisenhower:
“We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. …"
Well, Ike was right. That’s just what’s happened.
This is simply ridiculous. Where is this military-industrial complex that siphons dollars from the poor? The federal government spends many times the defense budget on everything under the sun. But of course, for a Liberal dinosaur like Andy Rooney, any dollar spent on something military is about 99 cents too much.
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
Comments
74 Responses to “Liberal dinosaur opens mouth, emits squeak”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
There are many dictators like Saddam around the world, my question is why we are not targeting them .So the argument that Saddam was removed because he was evil, has, simply ,no leg to stand upon.
All this crap about us going to war so Iraqis could play gamecube are nothing but BS. We thought they had WMD and we could replace Saddam easily then have the oil flow freely. Sounded good at the time. Too bad the Iraqis were a bunch of welfare state babies and cant take care of themselves. We are now in a bad situation and we need to get TF out. Screw the Iraqis. GWB is dumbfounded the plan failed and is clueless how to extracate our military from this cesspool.I am a conservative and GWB is on my excriment list "Big Time". I throw my hands up in disgust and pray for our troops who will die for a bunch of @#$%^.
Easy on the innuendo gregg. Squawkbox
Check this out - takes a little while to load. Best use of “Careful With That Axe Eugene” I’ve ever seen:
http://theunitedamerican.blogs.com/Movies/2000A/2000.html
Nice movie, DoctorMonroe. Its funny though, (not funny ha-ha, funny strange), all of the quotes in the “movie” are very specific, as in “our intelligence says” and “the british gov’t has told us” etc. As a manager for the largest organization in history, do you think GWB has time to review every document produced, read the comments on every Islamic website, listen to every briefing given? No, I manage only a handful of people and I don’t know everything they do. I rely on them to do their job. Yes, I take responsibility for their shortcomings, but I don’t fire them nr do I resign when things don’t go exactly as planned. Get a grip. I can’t stand so many things GWB has done, but even if it were about oil (which its not) 2000 lives is worth our security. Veteran proud!
And Rahman, give it time. Even Hitler’s war machine couldn’t handle war on two fronts. (I am not comparing GWB to Hitler, but almost everyone in Germany supported the war effort in the 30s. Not at all like the USA today.)
Yeah. And most Yanks supported the war effort in Europe between ‘41 and ‘45. ‘Cause it was JUST.
This one would be a joke if people weren’t dying. And it isn’t just our boys and girls. Its a bunch of Iraqis too. And you know what? We’re losing. On the ground, and in the hearts and minds of those we most need to persuade of the nobility of our intentions.
Oh…one more thing; before we go to war, we bloody well better have a CinC who pays attention to the details.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/351579p-299888c.html
I think the most important point she made in the entire opinion piece was this:
“The other panelist - an Egyptian editor - insisted that America is just plain evil and nothing it can do will change his opinion.
There may be no way to change the mind of anyone like that.”
To many, including many Americans, America is “Just Plain Evil”, and nothing anybody can do will change that.
Besides, other opinions in this piece, such as the following:
“I am anti-war and anti-violence,” a woman at the Women’s Research Center at Ankara University told The Associated Press. “I am not anti-American.”
lead me to believe the author was looking for no balance in this opinion piece. The “anti-war and anti-violence” crowd forgets one thing: Certain folks speak one language and one language only.
Besides, I would love to see a replay of WWII - exact same scenario in today’s cultural context (with embedded reporters to boot). I bet that American support for the war would not work out the same way.
To characterize every single one of those statements (several of which were almost identical to some liberal politician’s statements) as outright lies is false, misleading, and irresponsible.
IMO, the jury is still out on some of them, and we may well never really know the answers.
In the video, that is…
A Sherman tank in WWII probably cost 50 times more than a Ford station wagon, a Stuart tank maybe only 30 times. What matters is how effective the weapon is on the battlefield.
The Abrahms tank is a horror for the enemy and so it should be.
Our biggest problem in this war is tiptoeing around the sensibilities and egos of a religious leadership and community who are the enemy. The Iraqis know these people are the enemy as they are being killed by them in greater numbers than our soldiers.
Much more progress could have been made had that fatboy mullah in Fallujah been killed in his mosque along with his buddies.
Bush sent us to Iraq for one reason. Maybe everyone remembers when he articulated it. I believe the quote was “That’s the man who tried to kill my daddy”.
Thanks to the good Dr. for the link. Unless we are confronted with the faces of those that have died they are just anonymous statistics. Which is exactly why the admin will not allow photos of the caskets.
In answer to the questions posed in the movie, yes to all. Mad, sad, enraged, pissed……. all of the above.
We are in a way we cannot win. It will infact make it harder for us to combat the terrorists we claim to be after.
unbelievable.
I was going to write a whole tirad on this post but thought against it as really it doesn’t matter. I have my own reasons to think the war in Iraq is a complete waste of life and money especially because we are lacking the hard evidence to prove a solid link to Saddam and WMD and al-Qaeda. But I do agree with this:
Another way the government is planning to pay for the war and the hurricane damage is by cutting spending for things like Medicare prescriptions, highway construction, farm payments, AMTRAK, National Public Radio and loans to graduate students. Do these sound like the things you’d like to cut back on to pay for Iraq?
well except maybe AMTRAK. Why as a society should we not take care of our elders and veterans. Loans to grad students are just that loans… have to pay them back… so whats wrong there?
Sure tanks cost more but thats what they are tanks, of course the $400 screwdriver comes to mind on the cost factor.
My biggest question? Someone please answer?
Why the h-e-double hockey sticks do we NEED to be a superpower anyway? The world survived with people for 65,000 years without my beloved USA having to be the world police. Why do we always have to spend my money and send my brother to war every time some crackpot comes to power? I agree with the fight to stop Hitler he murdered 6 million +… but Stalin he killed 20 million did we try and stop him? How many Saddam kill? 20,000? The sudanese and the somalians have killed 200 times that.
As I said it before how is boosting the Saudis power in the mideast helping our national security? I’ll be a silly school boy here….
Uhhhhh… isn’t Osama a Saudi? Uhhhh…. wasn’t 85% of those involved with Sept 11 attacking my beloved New York City and messing with my freidns, family, and countrymen…. weren’t they Saudi’s too. Uhhh… were any of those involved Iraqi’s? Where or where is the money and logistics trail… that proves any other countries were involved?
By the way if it truly exists? Prove it then Lets smite ‘em.
oh please! can’t we all just get along? Be nice to everyone and they’ll be nice to us.
Seem’s to me we were being attacked by militant Muslims long-long before 9-11. Being nice just dosen’t cut it. Lonestartimes.com is full of tit sucking crybabies. As someone said “I could carve more backbone out of a bannana than you could out of this bunch of pu%*ies. You girley men should move to SanFrancisco, France or Canada, if you haven’t already. Or better yet, move your cr*p to airamerica.
rj
^
|
|
Now there’s a voice of reason (not). Far be it from me to espouse liberal viewpoints, but tirades like that only give them ammunition.
I am not sure how many, but many young men and woman from San Francisco have served, lost their life, or suffered horrible injuries. Yes, like it or not San Francisco is part of the good ol USA.
France like it or not has been quite involved in Afghanistan.
Once again when there is no good reasoned defense of our situation in Iraq, those that cannot reason start with the name calling.
Yes there were attacks on us long before 911. And on 9/11 we suffered a horrible loss. But no shred of evidence links Iraq.
Iraq is a quagmire. No reasoned thought can defend what has happened there.
Did anyone listen to GWB in his weekly radio address ? How did that square with the testimony of Richard Myers, Don Rumsfeld, or Gen Casey ? It does not.
rj:
Why don’t you just say what’s on your mind and quit beating around the bush?
Wow!
Why does everyone always result to insulting San Fransicoians(sp), canadians, and the french or accuse anyone who does not sell out to the GOP as being Anti-American. While I am not a liberal and cannot stomach most of their views on society, I can’t align myself with the GOP either because everytime I disagree with someone from the right on a topic, they call me un-American or Anti-American. Well not the only reason but hopefully you get my point. So I challange any of you on US History or Goverment/Public Policy.
People on the right for example say Cindy Sheehan isn’t an american, or she’s a liberal whinning cry baby.
Why can’t people use their heads and say that Cindy is misguided, perhaps a little on the not so bright side even. BUT she is an American at least until she renouces her citizenship and she is exercising her first amendment right, you know the amendment that is in that little piece of paper that we supposedly live, fight, and die for.
TO Feagen Post 16 is not misguided and I find it hard for anyone to argue with it.
Besides how can anyone be upset with non-americans being un-american I mean they are are they not? Un-American that is, stop being so ethnocentric.
jeffd, I am unclear as to the your reference to my post.
Sheehanhas definitely stated some unfair and probably even untrue things about our gov’t and specifically about the President. In wartime (and that’s basically what we’re in) such things could be considered “un-American”.
Not that she isn’t an American, but she’s definitely been co-opted by the “Liberal Whining Cry-Babies”, and in the process become one herself.
Somebody refresh my memory. When Clinton bombed Bosnia into the stoneage were there protesters from the left going bananas like they are now? Me thinks they have no credibility. Either you protest all war or no war. Cant just pick and choose based on which party starts it.
Sorry I beg to differ. You can most certainly be against the War in Iraq without being against all war. You will be hard pressed to find anyone who did not advocate going after the Taliban (the same Taliban GWB hosted here in Texas while Gov.) You will be hard pressed to find any opposition expressed about going to war in WWII after Pearl Harbor.
I can support the death penalty while not supporting the death penalty for those that are underage.
Sorry your argument makes no sense at all.
Sorry Fagan these nuts only come out when Republicans go to war. Show me where the left protests a Democrat at war.
Seems there were many “nuts” on the other side when Clinton went to war. I remember any number of comments by Mr. Delay himself. He said something like “you can support the troops while not supporting the war”. That is paraphrasing but guess it depends on which side the nut falls.
But there was no argument with Afghanistan.
Your leader Shehan is just as mad about Afganistan. Why was Bosia ok and Iraq not? What was the difference really?
Listen, if it were up to me Iraq,Iran,Syria,Afgansistan and Mecca would be a shiny piece of glass. Just be thankful gregg isnt King.
Today’s wars are different - it was easy to say after Pearl Harbor that we needed to go to war against Japan. It is not so easy to pursue a war against an ideology such as radical Islam that is not necessarily directly (or even indirectly) tied to a particular government. Afghanistan was easy to choose as a target because of the Taliban, but other targets are far more elusive.
My name calling is open, yours is veiled in your long winded post stating your I can be for this and not for that war cop-out. Your creative writing (not) only impresses yourselves.
Did I say something bad about San Francisco, Canada and France? Please, let me apologize. I meant to add Denmark and Holland.
rj
Cindy Sheehan is not my leader. She is a mother who lost her son in a war that was ill advised at best. I agree with her views re. Iraq, and support her right to express any view she holds.
I find myself at a loss, I am in agreement with JimB. This is a new world. We are fighting against those that have no national allegiance. But that being said we are using old world methods to fight this theology. And we are fighting it in the wrong place. We attackted a nation. Which is exactly what Jimb points out we cannot do now.
Feagan said “But there was no argument with Afghanistan.”
That’s demonstrably false. There certainly was argument against the war in Afghanistan, and it was from many of the same folks who are against the war in Iraq. Here are some of them. Here are some more. R.W. Apple compared Afghanistan to the “quagmire” of Vietnam while Ground Zero was still smoldering.
Of course there was argument. There is always argument. Ok, point made. Just as I could if I had the desire find many quotes from the left that opposed Bosnia. And as I have said I could find those on the right that made argument about Bosnia.
When GWB made the decision to go after the Taliban, I and most on the left supported him. Can someone please tell me though when they became the enemy. OBL was in Afghanistan when GWB hosted the Taliban in Texas.
#27,
Using logic and facts and avoiding ad hominem attacks is a good strategy for convincing other people of your point of view. Proceeding in an argument with that in mind is not creative writing, but rather, common sense. I say this to you as a fellow conservative.
There is no end to the debate. Nothing anyone can say now will convince me the war in Iraq was necessary. And nothing I can say will convince Bramanti, rj, gregg and others of my viewpoint. That is fine. But that begs the question where are we now and what are doing to make the situation better. GWB says things are great and that the Iraqis are building their own defenses so they can take the lead. Casey and Myers say that is not so…… What is the answer, what is the plan now ? more of the same ?
Denmark has troops in Iraq for your edification and for some reason supports this inane war.
Bosnia was a completely different circumstance then Iraq and we had the a large UN/NATO support. However, In the USA there were protestors against that as well.
John Walker Lyndh is a un-america and a tratior who I hope is in a nice painful cell somewhere’s. Rooney, Sheehan they are just speaking their mind, perhaps misguided in some areas but that is why we have America for the “freedom.”
I support the troops as our fellow Americans but I oppose the war. I do support the ideal of freedom, just not us violently forcing it on others. I support our actions in Afghanistan. But the reasons for Iraq were all wrong and now we are bogged down in a losing battle. I think those 140,000 troops scouring Afghanistan and Pakistan probably would have netted the real enemy by now. Also why don’t we invade Indonesia, Yemen or the random African Nation. They have terrorist attacks every year it seems and they have killed more Americans then Iraq under Saddam ever has.
“Logic and facts” Who’s logic, here, is credible and just what “facts” do any of us have?
We all just argue our opinions.
ad hominem;
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect.
2 : marked by an attack on an opponent’s character rather than by an answer to the contentions made.
You ask me not to attack an opponent’s character, but in the same breath you insult my intelect by accusing me of ad hominem attacks?
I say that I don’t like some of the logic opined here, and in my opinion it mostly comes from arm chair generals. Just, for arguments sake, where do your military minds think we should be fighting this war against muslim terrorist? Please, give us something difinitive that we could use to say “darnit he’s got something there.”
“Mecca would be a shiny piece of glass” Sounds good to me.
My only objection is that we seem to not be fighting with the full force of our arsenal and not letting the military direct the fighting.
rj
From one “armchair general” to another, I will tell you that I agree 100% with the following statement:
“My only objection is that we seem to not be fighting with the full force of our arsenal and not letting the military direct the fighting.”
There is an obvious difference between that statement and “titsucking crybabies”. The shiny piece of glass thing doesn’t sound so bad to me either, provided we don’t waste the billions of barrels of oil we need in the process.
Good to see that the chickenhawk Bramanti chimed in. That always get’s me going. Also good to see about half of this righwing blog finally swaying the right way and opposing this money sucking war that is doing nothing for anyones safety.
WMD - NO
Al Quaeda Link - NO
9/11 Link - NO
Fighting them over there so they’re not over here - NO (just ask London and Bali among others)
We will stand down when the Iraqis stand up - hmmm
Insurgency on it’s last throes - NO
Billions of Dollars spent - YES
Approx 2000 Dead - Yes
Let’s keep turning the tide here on LST and take back our republican party from the chickenhawk imitatitators.
Here’s to TRADITIONAL republican values. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY!!!!!!!!!
ok! “titsucking crybabies” after review, could be construed as some what excessive. No apology, thats just me and my passion for things which concern our efforts to carry the fight to the enemy. If I were 40 years younger, I’d be there. I was there (40 years ago) and was not pleased with the direction of that war (conflict) and pray to God we don’t fall into the same trap of a minority (protesters) having the clout to make our leaders second guess their objective. Lets face it brothers, the people who attacked us on 9-11 will not give up their hatred of America and western Europe by being reasoned with. They only understand brute force. Lets give it to them in spades; (not to be confused with a PC incorrect term).
rj
RJ,
What many here don’t seem to understand is that those (like you) who want to take it to them in spades are also a minority (just like the protesters).
But, as time goes on and this useless war moves forward and causes more death and more taxes (yes it will cause more taxes, we’re just borrowing to pay for it now, but, don’t worry, your kids and grandkids will pick up the tab later) those that oppose it are turning into the majority.
And, when it costs too much, it will be over, no matter how bad you want to “give it to them in spades”. At least you apparently fought before and didn’t stay home cleaning your weapons and contributing in other ways.
You lefties out there. OK, I admit,Iraq is an absolute debacle. For some reason these Arabs dont want to be dragged into the 21st century. Give us credit for trying. OK, now what? What is your solution other than putting out tails between our legs and running like girls. No offense to girls.
Gimie 4 things, no psychobable.
1.
2.
3.
4.
I fully understand that we are a minority. But for the sake of the Vietnam-era soldiers who were spit on by their own countrymen, as well as those who have fought before or since, I do not accept appeasement of an enemy who hates us for our very way of life.
#38,
yes I didn’t stay home, but my father did and contributed in other ways.
What I fail to understand is if we fail to win this war, I see no stability anywhere in the “free world”
for our children and grandchildren.
They’ll be giving it to us in spades.
The cost of the war? When do you think all the equiptment that’s being used was paid for? Are we paying for it on an as use basis? No! It was paid for by tax $’s years ago. Our military is something we cannot afford to neglect. It keeps guy’s like you safe and comfey behind you computer punching the lights out of anyone who supports defending our country. As time goes on I hope for your sake that I’m right and we win, because you’ve given up. One other thing, unless you aren’t aware of it, England, Spain and Bali is a long way from your living room. If the war cost too much then 3 trillion $’s on failed social programs is, I guess something that libs can be darned proud of. Lib’s are whining about the cost of defending our country rather than spending it on some give away redistributon of other peoples money.
monbak.
rj
Gregg, that is the 64,000 question. What do we do now. I dont suggest we cut and run. That would be a debacle squared. But I ask what the plan is now. You responed with a question.
so let me ask again. What do we do know, when even the admin cant get the facts right with what the military tells us.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Just four simple ideas of what we do with this war to win it. If you support it please list the four things that we can do now to win this war. I am sincere, I would love to know.
rj, you and I agree, we should take it to the people who attacked us, in spades. We just got the wrong people. It was OBL and Al Qaida, not Iraq.
1. Call Iran and say. Hey you want this piece of crap? Well, give us cheap oil and you can have this *&*%$^* N place.
2. Call Syria and say. Hey, we still have some left over bombs. Where do you want them dropped?
3. Call Pakistan and say. Hey Musharif, getyour ass up and get UBL. You have 2 days and we are commin in. Screw you.
4.Drive a bunch of oil tankers to the gulf and fill them suckers up. Then trash the place like a good 70’s rock star.
I was hoping for an honest answer.
So that will win the war on Terror.
So we nuke Syria, we get in bed with Iran, and we destabilize Pakistan (they have nukes, just can’t contain their own program). Sounds like a great Idea.
What a great way to win the war on Terror.
Still havent heard your solution.
Feagan
Do you read the papers and listen to the news? Al Qaida is in Iraq. They have been there and they are getting bigger world wide. Here is a report from the Federation of American Scientist 2004 that you would do well to read. Scroll down to Chapter 3. This is about as an unbiased report I can find for you. Below is a small portion of what you seem to want to deny.
Squawk, I have not read the entire piece, I will, but I read what you posted. How does that justify going to War in Iraq. I have never said Al Qaida was not a threat.
Might I suggest we commit sufficient personnel and materiel to the region, but not one bit more than is absolutely necessary to defeat a tinpot army, without the aid of our allies, who will flock to join us when they realize how just our cause is, and within a year or two we’ll have a fledgling democracy taking root in the middle east, from which, like dominoes, the rest of the middle east will sprout into west germany post WW2…
Oh, hang on! Doh!
Greets Feagan,
There is alot of historical fact concerning Al Qaida in there. I am sure that you have read/heard every other justification for the war in Iraq maybe this will provide a little more insight for you. Maybe not. These guys have been around the world causing trouble for a long time and are an ongoing problem. I readily admit that I believe that part of the war in Iraq is taking the fight to Al Qaida amongst other things. Thanks for taking the time to at least read the report just the same.
Gregg, I don’t have the answer, readily admit that. But what I do know is GWB’s plan is not working. He is not even on the same page as his military. And…. you agree his plan is not working.
What I wish is GWB and his Admin would get on the same page as his military. Acknowledge the plan is bad, and re work it.
What is the answer now ? who the heck knows. Is this plan working ? Everyone agrees including the military, it is not.
You can’t beat terrorists with conventional military force. You just can’t. It has to be done with covert ops and intelligent law enforcement. We should have had a black ops crew into Afghnistan to extract Osama on the afternoon of 9/11, and he should have been tried in the US and sentenced to death.
We bolloxed it up because the PNAC wanted a war in the region to:
(a) satiate their bloodlust
(b) vindicate their policies
(c) increase the value of their holdings
(d) demoralize their political opposition
(e) strengthen their grip on the reins of power
(f) all of the above.
Unfortunately, the “opposition” bought into it, and so, ladies and gents, here we are. No safer, no richer, no more popular, and no more likely to beat the terrorists than we were on 9/10.
The whole thing has been a mismanaged bungle from the get go. And whats worse, its cost us our reputation, our blood, and our treasure.
Squawk, just downloaded the report. I will read it, but what I find interesting in the start, the report is by the U.S. Department of State. Not the Federation of American Scientist.
Squawk, Ok to be honest I said I would read the report. I will read the chapter you mention. I don’t think I will read the other 120 or so pages. But I will keep it. It looks to be of interest, so thanks for the link.
Just want to be clear, in case I am quized on some item on page 98.
Feagan:
“I find myself at a loss, I am in agreement with JimB.”
You could knock me over with a feather.
In the interest of honesty, though, I would only say that I meant that selecting a target for the war on terror is difficult, and admittedly we have not done the best job possible, but I certainly don’t think the situation in Iraq is not redeemable. I still do think having Saddam out of power is better than having him in power.
An effective exit strategy does not exist in my opinion right now. It would be far better to do a few final ‘garbage removal’ operations (these would be major offensives with a lot less regard for folks hiding in towns and mosques) while working with them to put the new government in place, and leave them to themselves. If we stay there until all conflict is gone, we will never leave.
Wow - you can knock me over with a feather twice:
“We should have had a black ops crew into Afghnistan to extract Osama on the afternoon of 9/11, and he should have been tried in the US and sentenced to death.”
A Doctormonroe statement that I agree with, too! We’re 2 in one day!
Feagan
You arte correct about the Department of State. I It came off the FAS site. I read their reply when it originally came out. Won’t bother you with that.
Did not mean to mislead.
One other thing check out the number of known organisations and the family tree.
Yep it is a long read. I suggest your favorite adult beverage accompany your perusal.
Regards
JimB, please tell me how we redeem the situation in Iraq. I am sincere in my question.
I have said I don’t think we can pull out now, but I do not like the alternative. I would love an idea, any idea as to how we can redeem this situation.
I stated that already, at least from a 10K foot level. I am no military strategist, and won’t pretend to be.
Basically, decimate the remaining opposition/”insurgents” in Iraq (give the military sufficient autonomy and resources to accomplish this, continue to negotiate with the interim government to set themselves up, complete the infrastructure repairs/rebuilds, and let them forge on from there. This should be done on a reasonable fixed timeframe, and if we have to ‘glass over’ a couple areas in Iraq, so be it (not advocating a nuclear attack, a few daisy cutters or MOAB’s would probably do just fine).
Seriously, why dont we put some sort of tracking implant with an explosive in the alcaders we catch, then release them back into the wild. Track them and blow them up when they get back to their lair. NAH, the ACLU would never go for that.
JimB, I just don’t see this. I would agree the military needs the autonomy, and GWB has not given it to them. I think Rummy needs to go, like two years ago. That being said I don’t see this fixing the problem. The terrorists will just keep multiplying. The factions in Iraq cannot agree on the govt.
In short I don’t think this is a battle we can win with force.
But as I have said, damned if I know the answer.
#56 Jimb,
Yeah, it would seem that I’ve found a bit of common ground with Feagan in an exchange of reading material ideas. Interesting to me that after a few days of blogging it becomes evident that conservatives and liberals can easily find common ground amongst themselves, but politicians work for years and achieve lesser results. I guess I believe in my heart (not the biological one) that we all want the best for our country, but simply differ in our means to achieve it. Once the rhetoric dissolves, we are all Americans for better or worse, not unlike a marriage.
And no, I’m not drunk.
You’re right - the terrorists will keep multiplying. However, I fear that they will keep multiplying anyway. Certainly, there is the theory that if we just pull out of the Middle East and let them be they would let us be, but the fact is that Islamo-facists will not rest until the world is a Muslim theocracy, or we die. This is a fight to the death, unfortunately.
scattered around the Houston metroplex there are three individuals laying on the floor, I have a vision of stars floating above their heads much like the old cartoons. They are out cold and next to them is a feather, glowing on the desk is a monitor with LST blinking on the screen.
Three may even be a conservative (not in the political sense) estimate.
My input;
The Germans and Japanese had people will to commit suicide in airplanes during WWII. People willing to kill themselves for someone else’s cause is nothing new.
The only way you can kill a snake is to cut its head off (or with a hoe).
When the top leaders of the Muslim extremist are sharing their seventy virgins, that’s when the terrorist activities will come to a grinding halt.
Turn Israel loose on them, kill the leaders, do it in a no BS manner, let them know by radio (AKA AL Jazeera) that we are going to get them and will not stop until they are all dead.
As I’ve said, These extremits have been attacking us for more than 20 years. We have just recently been atacking them. I’m one for fighting back. I refuse to stick my head in the sand and pretend this will go away without a fight. At least the North Vietnamese had enough valor to fight in the field. They didn’t set off bombs in crowded market places killing innocent’s. We are seeing a new enemy, one that is willing to die for a terrannical religion, not freedom.
rj
RJ, as has been pointed out here, these fighters don’t share a common national allegiance. They are mobile. They are faceless and they don’t wear a uniform.
So how and where do we fight them. You and I agree, we need to take the battle to them. But just how do we do that ? “They” are everywhere.
Just destroying Iraq and putting in “our” government will not solve the problem, they will move to another battle field. They have no borders.
Good question!
“We” are all the nations of our planet who have a desire for freedom. We fight them in every city, county, region, nook and cranny were they hide. This storm has been brewing for decades, it will not go away overnight.
We didn’t put “our” government in Iraq. The brave souls who had the balls to show up, in the face of the enemy, to vote in greater numbers then we, installed their government. A government of the people, by the people and for the people. What more could you ask for. Until recently these middle eastern countries were ruled by war lords who’s hearts were cold as the steel that pierced the body’s who defied them.
Look back into our history, it took years to firmly establish our government of freedom. Once we forced out the Brits we were still a shaky weak country, but we didn’t give up.
rj
RJ,for the most part I agree with you. But I still don’t see an answer as to how we fight these people. I would offer there must be a better way than brute force. Don’t go off on me about not having the will to fight, that is not the case, I just don’t think scattered force will win this war. Maybe the force is coupled with something else, hell I don’t know.
But every nook and cranny, there are lots of nooks and crannies. And there are lots of countries and lots of faceless enemies, they multiply like crazy.
We have a limited force to offer in response.
let me use another analogy;
we’ve all heard of the “long arm of the law”.
Criminals may blend into society for extended periods of time, but eventually they are caught.
Let say the the said criminal is a child molester. He/she may leave a trail of molested children all over our country, but sooner or later some flat foot is going to nab them. Child molesters are not going to go away, and we don’t stop their pursuit.
Hell! I’m no authority on anything, but its of my opinion that this new era of terror is going to be with us for a long time. I’ll not accept it as the norm.
The Israelis have been negotiating with the Palestinians for 30 years and have accomplished nothing. Only their relentless retaliation keeps Israels existence.
rj
You are right. We cannot give up the fight, no argument. Negotiation is not the “only” answer either.
I fear you are also right that this will be a long, long, era of terror.
I find myself where I began. Have no Idea what the solution is.
To use a stupid reality show example, it’s a case of “Outwit, Outplay, Outlast”.
We definitely “stay the course” but we also need to be adaptive and willing to make multiple “course corrections”. Finally, we need to understand and accept that it will take a long long time and cost lives and money.
All the other side has to do is keep striking randomly and wait us out and they win. Seems like an impossible situation, but it’s more like the ongoing struggle against good and evil. You just have to keep up the fight. For Christians such as myself, we believe that good will triumph completely one day, but it won’t be man that pulls that one off.
I’ll use my entry #73 to ask the question:
Is this the longest running comment section in LST history?
Who would have thought an old guy with furry eyebrows could get such mileage.
JEREMY WEIDENHOF RESPONDS: An interesting question, Mike. I’ve checked with the crack(ed) LST research staff to see if we can come up with an answer on that one.
UPDATE: At this point Mike, our "staff" (Bramanti) has come up with the figure of 200+ comments from back in the ChronicallyBiased days, so we have a ways to go here. Could be a "furry eyebrow" record, though.
2nd UPDATE: Bramanti did some further research and 163 is the previous high score for a comments section.
JEREMY WEIDENHOF
Uhoh you jinxed it. And the thread was doing so well. Shame. Remember a watched boil never pots.