Lets call it like it is. Iraq is a shitstorm. I have my thoughts on the matter . The blitzkrieg assault on Baghdad was a mistake for example. But come on...what the fuck do I know. About as much as every other knucklehead giving their opinion on this war, which means not very much. Well thats not exactly true I do in fact know more than most knuckleheads, but you get my point. I know this much, we need to win. Withdrawing will not make us safer. Redeploying will not make us safer. Cut and running will not make us safer. Winning and winning alone will.
When our military has been able to conduct the war effort....we have won every single conflict weve ever fought. Politicians lose wars. Political media driven movements lose wars. Pussies lose wars. Our military dont and they havent and they wont.
So if the liberal wing of the democrat party would stop tying our military's hands behind their backs, that'd be great.
We are at war make no mistake about it and contrary to what the liberals would have you believe it didnt start and wont end with Iraq. Im afraid its too late for liberals to understand this as the word Iraq is already ingrained in their membranes (insane in the brains) like cattle being branded with the marks of halliburton and quagmire and oil and nazi and fascist and McCarthyism and Vietnam. Theirs is an ideology of catchphrases, nothing more.
Their thought process is that since the war in Iraq isnt going swimmingly, we should just leave and then there will be no more war. They dont get it. Iraq is to Vietnam as Vietnam is to quagmire as Cain is to Carlos. All wars are bad, but some wars are necessary. I'd have to go back to the Revolutionary War to think of a war where the safety and freedoms of American citizens were in as much risk as they are now. This is NOTHING like Vietnam. Let it go hippies, Im sure Woodstock was great, but you have to let it go. Once we left, the Vietnamese posed no threat to attack the United States of America...such is not the case in the current War on Terror.
I could sit here and type example after example of the Iraqi War in comparison to damn near every war we have ever fought. Why the fuck is it that you only hear about comparisons to Vietnam? How about how Gen. George Washington lost Brooklyn, lost Manhattan, lost New Jersey to the redcoats. That sure as hell was a quagmire and all low points in American military history for sure, but in case you dont remember that one, we came back and kicked some ass and thats why you dont pay six bucks for a rather right honorable very grand earl grey at Starbucks. In the War of 1812 our enemies burnt down the White House and set fire to Buffalo. We won that one too, by the way. I can go on and on up and until today. Weve fought and won other battles since Vietnam. Weve done some good things, freed alot of people. But its always Vietnam. Always.
Why no comparison to Kosovo and how we backed the Muslim extremist KLA?
Is it because Vietnam is a war that the media perceives that we lost or is it because its a war where they correctly understand that they had a hand in dictating policy, sabotaged the war effort and have ever since incorrectly labeled as Nixon's war...and are now trying to do it again just for old times sake to recapture the glory disco days of the 70's. Either way its shameful. The only excuse is that they want us to lose, and that makes them traitors.
Liberals are wrong, dangerously wrong. Bush didnt start this war, he just decided to fight back. As Ive said many times before when Im in a barfight I want the guy swinging barstools on my side, not the liberal hippie beatnik chatting up the french chick in the corner. If they want to oppose the war fine, they are free to do so. They can even criticize how the war effort is being fought, as there are many questions that need to be asked. But the plan should not be when we will surrender, or withdraw or redeploy or whatever the fuck these people want to call it..the plan should be how do we win.
"The pacifist is as surely a traitor to his country and to humanity as is the most brutal wrongdoer" Theodore Roosevelt
EE-Aw!!!
10 comments:
I'm sorry that you see every liberal as a one dimensional catch phrase blabbing fucking idiot.
I think there are idiots on both sides-most actually- but I sure as hell dont lump everyone together, nor do I just throw all of their positions into a blender.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I have made efforts to listen to your words as you write them, not as a "person on the right". Sometimes I have failed and have made assumptions and sometimes I have reacted to the "right" as opposed to you. I think I've been hitting my head against a wall for a long time with you, never ever feeling even heard. Thats not dialogue,thats just a waste of everyone's time.
I dont agree with many things you say, but I also dont agree with all liberals either. I am a mixed bag, socially libertarian, financially suspicious. I think you just divide people into two camps because its faster and easier. Whats the point of coming here?
All I have asked you to do is demonstrate HOW it keeps us safer. Instead of just repeating that it does.
You are one to throw catch phrases around without support quite a bit yourself.
Well Liliana, I appreciate your liberal hippie guilt pity party, but its not needed...I’m ok.
I divide people into two camps on this issue because there are only two camps to put them in. There may be sub camps within the main two, but that’s irrelevant to this point. Those that want to win, and those that don’t. It’s pretty simple actually.
You are one of the people that don’t and have even admitted that you don’t think that we are even at war, because terrorists by definition are not "real soldiers" (yet you would bestow on them full geneva convention rights afforded to "real soldiers"). It makes no sense to me. Put your dictionary down, open your eyes and use some common sense. How can I debate with you how to better fight this war when in your make believe world we aren’t even in one.
Your irrationality knows no bounds. God forbid we are ever attacked again, in yours and your ilk’s mind it will be because of Iraq and not because terrorists have declared war on us. Your hatred for this administration has fried your brain. Even if you are right about invading Iraq being a mistake, it doesn’t matter any more. alqaeda is in Iraq. Now you can go ahead and blame Bush for them being there, but it doesn’t change the fact that they are in Iraq now. You get lost in all the Bush blaming and can’t see that simple fact.
Alqaeda who declared war on us a decade ago and have been attacking us ever since and who have recently stated their intent to destroy the White House and kill all the infidels (you and me). Yeah those guys, they’re in Iraq...I don’t care who you think is to blame. I blame alqaeda. You blame Bush. Doesnt matter if Im right or you are, alqaeda are in Iraq and I want to kill them.
If we retreat from Iraq, they get stronger...and I aint having that.
Even though whenever a direct question is posed to you here at the Aurora by either the Rhino or myself you seem to disappear for a few days, I will show you the same courtesy you deny us by answering yours.
Every alqaeda we kill on their turf makes us safer. Every terrorist leader we capture and imprison on their turf makes us safer. Every bit of intel we collect on their turf makes us safer. Every al-qaeda in Iraq and not in Brooklyn makes us safer.
You beginning to understand or is it all still Bush lied kids died blood for oil bullshit to you. Feel free not to answer that last one, we already know.
I shouldnt have to explain to you that when I throw my catchphrases like commie, hippie, pinko etc around...I am making a mockery of your side with their incessant nazi and fascist references. I could close my eyes and pick a lefty blog at random and dollars to donuts a Republican is getting called either a nazi or a fascist, probably both.
...and the reason that you come here is the same as every other female reader. Chicks dig us.
...and once again you do not address a single point I make, put your reading glasses on and try again..I made quite a few.
But instead you choose to divert the topic and call me a liberal basher. Aw the poor victims.
But there you go, I did not say those things. Some of it you concluded from what I have said or assumed, but I did not say all those things.
I think "winning" using your words would be if we dealt with Afghanistan, for example, where there is a pathological lawlessness, where just the poverty alone makes people support things like terrorists and druglords because that is the nature of the place and we just moved on while things go right back to how they were before. I never said any of those things about the war on terror and I never said that there arent people that want us dead. Of course they do, and they need to stop acting like fanatic sheep pussies and stop hiding in elementary schools/hospitals and show themselves, and stop being bitches for the real players which are NOT Allah and Mohammed but the big money that is manipulating their "jihad"jungle gyms.
What I do think is that they have figured out how to play the people in countries of turmoil. They have figured this out with hezbollah, with hamas, and they are essentially buying the cooperation of the people with oil money we keep giving them which is why I think the best way to fight them is by cutting off their escalating wealth. How can you argue with that? Thats my view, in a nutshell. The other shit is a simplification, liberal shorthand. I would never actually spend the time to go over what I REALLY think because it just cant be distilled down like that. And you dont want to hear it anyway, lets be honest.
If Bin Laden didnt have money and resources the Taliban would not have given a shit about him, he could have just as easily dealt with the NA against the Taliban. And now in iraq there are groups being helped by people with deep pockets, and there is no incentive for them to take responsibility for what is going on there. These deep pockets can outlast us, and they can be dedicated because they are not wrapped up in the things our resources are wrapped up in.
You are right that at this point, the past is the past and the left needs to move on. But you have me all wrong with my opinions.
I really think cutting them off FINANCIALLY is the way to go. Why cant America make it a patriotic mandate to cut oil use? We've done it before. People used to give up all kinds of things. Now they willingly pile wealth onto the Middle East. Thats fucked, donkey.
We ask our soldiers to die and we cant even stop driving SUV's? Gimme a break! Thats patriotic?
They need to use their own resources to rebuild and provide their own security.
I dont think letting our men and women get shot at and explode month after month after month is doing what we hoped it would do. Let's get ourselves independent, on track, deal with trade imbalance, protect ourselves the smart way. Why cant you as a nationalist-protectionist get behind that? Stop the protests-park the damn cars.
You have never heard me say much of what you wrote here. In a year I have spent more time arguing against things I never said than the things I have which admittedly were not all well thought out.
Unlike you, I dont claim to know the best way to fight terror. I dont know what category exactly a terrorist falls into legally, I dont have the answers to everything like you do. All I can do is read whats around, dsicuss it, and when people make a good case, consider it.
But you insult me on an almost daily basis and whether chicks dig you or not- wouldnt you agree that a woman that seeks out somebody hateful each day is pretty fucking stupid? I have no idea why I read your words, maybe because I think you are extremely intelligent but unfortunately have some kind of personality problem? I dont know, but your nastiness and arrogance will be your undoing. You are most definitely not like other people but it feels awful to communicate with you.
You place a high value on the US military--the military has said there is no military solution to the war in Iraq. Henry Kissinger just said there is no military solution, although he also says we shouldn't leave. We don't have enough troops there for a military solution and we can't send enough more to make a difference."Victory" makes a nice slogan but you can't define it and you don't have a plan to achieve it.
The problem is that the guy on the left (AlQaeda)at the bar hit us and we attacked the guy on the right (Iraq)
A prominent Intelligence figure said recently that Iraq is as bad as it looks, and Afghanistan is worse than it looks. Blame Bush, Rumsfeld,Cheney not the "liberals."
Well then the guy on the right (Iraq) shouldnt have been pumping his fists. Its a good way to get knocked out. Kind of like how we declared war on Germany after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. Now see, that is an actual reality based comparison as opposed to just throwing Vietnam out there as the left and the media is want to do.
I know how much liberals like to re-write history but lets clear the air here for a moment. The only person to blame for Iraq is Saddam Hussein. He repeatedly violated UN sanctions and resolutions knowing full well that if he continued to do so he risked another US attack just as the President prior to Bush had authorized. If in fact Saddam was not working on wmd's (which the new york times has recently proved he was)then it was a bad bluff on his part and he should have allowed the weapons inpsectors unfettered access, which he didnt in defiance of UN Resolutions.
I realize how much liberals prefer to interpret words, but victory actually means what it means. In this case a free standing Iraqi government, a self-sustaining Iraqi security force and the eradication of alqaeda and their allies. Victory isnt a slogan its a goal. We can argue how best to achieve it, but I hope we all at least can agree that we must try.
Weve already defeated Saddam's Iraq. We are now fighting an ongoing war on terror. Iraq and Afganistan just happen to be the battlefields.
Because things arent going well is not a reason to just cut and run. Even in wars like the Mexican-Amercian which by all accounts was a rout, we suffered setbacks. Wars by definition dont go smoothly.
Im sorry I just do not believe in the sincerity of the anti-war argument of the left. Im not questioning either of you individually, but as a whole it seems more anti-Bush than it is pro-peace. I go to every anti-war rally thats held in NYC (hippie chicks are easy, what can I say)The same people who say we shouldnt use force in Iraq are the same ones saying we should use force in the Sudan. Its disingenuous at best and anti-Arab at worst.
The liberal arguments always come right back to "Americans need to stop driving their big, big cars and using up all the oil because all the money we pay the Middle Easterners causes them to run a fucking mok and blow up kids and chop peoples heads off!"
Or is it, "Wah, wah, I hate big manly men in big trucks because they threaten me and I'm a dyke and have no penis and can never be a real man and I don't want anyone to drive big cars, because it makes me angry, so I want the government to make people stop driving them, because I do, that's why, I want it, I want my way, boo hoo, but keep your hands of my body and don't tell me who to love."
It's always our fault on account of we are so damn powerful and important in the grand scheme of things. Well since it's all about us, lefties, you might as well get used to it and sit back and enjoy the ride. One thing about Noam Chomsky that's always cracked me up is that if he thinks the US is really so fucking evil, then what can anybody really do about it. Everyone is just to doomed be helpless in our path. So just bend over and take it like the poor whining emasculated men and masculine women you are.
And if the US didn't buy the oil, you can be damned sure the Chinese would and we would have no influence in the Middle East at all.
Oh but wait, that is exactly what the left wants. It thinks the third world, who can not wipe its own ass, much less support its own people, has the answers to all mankind's problems. Well maybe, but they are to the far right on animal and human rights. They like cock fighting and bull fighting too.
The left doesn't want people to drive, except leftists themselves who can't ever stop driving. Just try and find parking in Berkeley California, even though they have a great public transit system, there are more cars than anywhere else in the Bay Area. The left wants to make people stop driving like my mom didn't want me to masturbate and they both have about as much effect. Besides I know for a fact my mom did it herself.
Well who can argue with logic like that?
You are right, Miss Carniverousness.
Thank you for clearing that up.
AND for helping me see that masturbation, should I need it, is ok. Because I give a shit what you think. I really do.
Thanks, Donkey. Its certainly run its course. I agree that we agree on far more than it seems, and probably far more than you know.
I'm a little late to the game, but i wanted to heap some praise on the donkey for this one. Excellent post. very well written and obviously well thought out.
Keep up the good work.
If the plan is to stay until we win then I repeat that I do not think it will work and I would favor withdrawal.
The US will probably stay however, against my sage advice, and, if so, I hope that I am wrong and that we win.
My prediction (and my crystal ball could be cloudy) is that we will, in fact, stay until we lose.It won't be pretty.
Post a Comment