I’m in complete agreement with Charles Krauthammer’s column on Friday at RealClearPolitics.
What other country, when attacked in an unprovoked aggression across a recognized international frontier, is then put on a countdown clock by the world, given a limited time window in which to fight back, regardless of whether it has restored its own security?
What other country sustains 1,500 indiscriminate rocket attacks into its cities — every one designed to kill, maim and terrorize civilians — and is then vilified by the world when it tries to destroy the enemy’s infrastructure and strongholds with precision-guided munitions that sometimes have the unintended but unavoidable consequence of collateral civilian death and suffering?
Hearing the world pass judgment on the Israel-Hezbollah war as it unfolds is to live in an Orwellian moral universe. With a few significant exceptions (the leadership of the United States, Britain, Australia, Canada and a very few others), the world — governments, the media, U.N. bureaucrats — has completely lost its moral bearings.
The word that obviates all thinking and magically inverts victim into aggressor is “disproportionate,” as in the universally decried “disproportionate Israeli response.”When the United States was attacked at Pearl Harbor, it did not respond with a parallel “proportionate” attack on a Japanese naval base. It launched a four-year campaign that killed millions of Japanese, reduced Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki to a cinder, and turned the Japanese home islands to rubble and ruin. Disproportionate? No. When one is wantonly attacked by an aggressor, one has every right — legal and moral — to carry the fight until the aggressor is disarmed and so disabled that it cannot threaten one’s security again. That’s what it took with Japan.
Britain was never invaded by Germany in World War II. Did it respond to the blitz and V-1 and V-2 rockets with “proportionate” aerial bombardment of Germany? Of course not. Churchill orchestrated the greatest land invasion in history that flattened and utterly destroyed Germany, killing untold innocent German women and children in the process.
The perversity of today’s international outcry lies in the fact that there is indeed a disproportion in this war, a radical moral asymmetry between Hezbollah and Israel: Hezbollah is deliberately trying to create civilian casualties on both sides while Israel is deliberately trying to minimize civilian casualties, also on both sides.
What on earth has happened since the moral resolve and clarity of the “Greatest Generation” that America is viewed as moral equivalents to beheaders, dictators and rapists. There are many (some GP readers) who still think that 9/11 was America’s Fault and not another battle in a World War declared on the West by Islamic fascists.
Of course the results of this survey speaks volumes, doesn’t it?
A plurality of 46% say protecting Israel’s right to exist is more important than securing an immediate ceasefire. Again, men (55%) and Republicans (62%) are more likely than women (37%) and Democrats (36%) to say protecting Israel should be the priority.
It is time for a war to be waged on all fronts in World War III. A war where there is nothing demanded of our enemies (nations and their terror-backed groups alike) except total and unconditional surrender.
**UPDATE** – Jules Crittenden at the Boston Herald weighs in with “this war must not end.”
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
Two points: first, it’s not at all clear who started this latest incident. I had assumed that it was an incursion by Hezbollah into Israel where the Israeli soldiers were captured. But it turns out that the soldiers may actually have been captured during an Israeli incursion into Lebanon. See Forbes for example http://tinyurl.com/hlln3 :”Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers during clashes Wednesday across the border in southern Lebanon.” If indeed it was an Israeli incursion, then that’s a pretty significant fact left out of most of the US media reports.
Second, you state the following:
“It is time for a war to be waged on all fronts in World War III.”
If you really believe that, then I want to hear you call for a full mobilization of the country including a draft and personal and financial sacrifice on the part of EVERYONE in this country. After all, our military is bogged down in Iraq and yet you are calling for “total and unconditional surrender” “of our enemies (nations and their terror-backed groups alike)”, a goal that dwarfs our current missions and commitment in Iraq and Afghanistan. Especially when you consider how degraded our military capability may be after nearly six years of Republican control and oversight http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,107179,00.html .
So how about it Bruce, ready to call yet for the draft and other sacrifices on the part of your fellow countrymen? If not, then your clarion call rings a bit hollow.
It is time for a war to be waged on all fronts in World War III.
Unfortunately, I wonder where the stomach to fight such a war will come from. There are too many people who act as though their pet political issues are more important than defeating Islamo-Fascism, Andrew Sullivan for example.
Sounds good to me, Ian.
I don’t think a draft is necessary. What is necessary is to let our military wage war against the enemy without having to kowtow to CAIR, the ACLU, and the editorial board of the New York Times.
Will the liberal-left be willing to sacrifice their preening and morally superior posing in order to win a war? Could we sacrifice our courts’ willingness to extend extreme interpretations of Constitutional protections to the favor of the enemy? Maybe we could sacrifice a little bit of privacy, by giving the Government a little more room to scrutinize suspicious activities?
Sounds good too, V the K. 🙂
#4: “I don’t think a draft is necessary.”
Then how are you going to pacify all these countries and terror groups? Even bombing them into submission will in the aftermath require invasion by ground forces and long term occupations of many countries. We will not have the support of a single other power so we will have to do this ourselves. We don’t have enough to do the job in Iraq and Afghanistan and Operation Yellow Elephant is not having much success so from where are the troops going to come if not via a draft?
At least Bruce admits the need for a draft. I assume he would call for drafting gay people as well.
I think a draft is a bad idea–it’s the fastest way I can think of to mobilize angry students against the U.S. government–although pushing to expand the armed forces can clearly be done in peace time; remember the Reagan-Weinberger build up of the 1980’s was done without a draft. Bush stopped the decline of the Clinton years; he hasn’t started rebuilding yet.
Even bombing them into submission will in the aftermath require invasion by ground forces and long term occupations of many countries.
My dear Ian, you’re not used to the concept of “total war”.
If Israel wanted to, even without going nuclear, it has the capability to create a firestorm in southern Lebanon that would make the destruction of Dresden look like a safety match in comparison, vaporizing the vast majority of Hizbollah, Hizbollah’s supporters, and everyone else with it.
THAT is V the K’s point. The reason that we require so many forces to fight these types of wars is because differentiating friend from foe takes time and on-the-ground eyes, and because we have made the choice not to use quicker and more devastating methods that erase everyone, friend or foe, within these areas.
Hizbollah, Hamas, al-Qaeda, and the like have realized that fact and are simply taking advantage of our generosity. By insinuating themselves into civilian populations, they force us to fight in a situation which greatly lessens our capability and increases the time it takes to handle such situations.
What would be useful is if hatemongering leftists such as yourself and Cindy Sheehan would love your terrorist friends into fighting openly and in honest battlefields. But as long as you defend their right to put missile launchers in the middle of civilian villages, you endanger not only the lives of the people at whom those missiles are pointed, but also the civilians in those villages.
Of course, you won’t do that because Hizbollah, Hamas, and al-Qaeda are anti-Bush — and anyone who is anti-Bush is excused in their every action in your worldview.
Actually, I’m not opposed to a draft. I’m also not sure it is necessary, but not opposed if that’s what it would take.
I think a really good start is to use the deserts in Iran for a nuclear testing ground. We just start testing small nukes where no one lives and then keep setting off bigger ones and setting them off closer and closer to Tehran. Live TV coverage of the cloud would be preferred too.
A motivated, professional army is more effective than an army of conscripts. Advancements in robotics, artificial intelligence, and other force multipliers further reduce the need for conscription. Furthermore, large numbers of conscripts would be ineffective without the political will to use them
I don’t think people have quite gotten their heads around the idea that this is not going to be a nineteenth/twentieth century war with large nation-state armies arrayed against each other. There are a few key nation-state actors waging war with their terrorist proxies, but occupation may not be the ideal way of dealing with them. Driving Al Qaeda out of Afghanistan and Iraq merely drove them to set up shop in Somalia, for example.
If I were convinced a draft were necessary, I would support it. But I don’t think it would be wise or necessary, at least not yet. Now, who on the left will support denying terrorists Constitutional rights, letting the government use coercive methods of interrogation, letting the government collect intelligence on terrorist groups and domestic groups who support them, the development of advanced technology weaponry including bunker-busting nukes, and the will to pre-emptively strike regimes that foster terrorism? With all these, the need for a draft becomes more remote.
Or, would the left simply prefer to send unwilling men and women to die because their moral vanity won’t permit them to do those things I just listed?
And ND30 makes a good point. Israeli airstrikes have destroyed less than 1% of Beirut. The US and Israel go to extreme lengths to avoid civilian casualties against an enemy that hides behind women and children. If we had wanted to, we could have laid waste to all of Iraq and southern Lebanon.
Bruce, of course the Left will ignore the central issue of your post –that is, more of them are squeamish about a true War on Terror along the lines you draw than are willing to step up to the plate, use American and Free World resources to quash the militant Left in the radical Muslim world. Except, of course, all those world leaders that JohnFKerry “speaks to on a regular basis and tell him they are worried about America’s cowboy politics on the world stage.
Instead, they’ll try a little ol’ ChickenHawk baiting (ala Ian’s comments above and countless other GayLeft comments I’ve read this morning on other blogs) and then it’s switch the bait time to DADTDHDP baiting. Switch the bait. Gheez, do these guys think its a used car lot?
Here’s the kernel I take away from any discussion about getting serious –deadly, mean, unwavering serious– about the WOT… the Left doesn’t want to be any part of it because it MIGHT include muzzling their “concern, policy differences, areas of disagreement… blah blah blah” and foregoing the cheap partisan gain they’ve become identified with in the last four years.
History is replete with leaders and countries and political movements who chose to be silent accomplices and, thereby, abetting agents when liberty was threatened by terrorists.
It is no different now; except the price those with courage and tenacity will have to pay is far greater because we countenance the silent accomplices of our enemies in the WOT.
China, Russia, France, some countries in South America, nearly 2/3rds of Africa and the UN should be made to feel the pain the Free World endures in the WOT.
Good points, VdaK… but the draft “dodge” this time is the Left’s use of it as a tool to dissuade or discredit others about the need for a serious WOT. Ian played it well; except the dog don’t hunt because we have the ability to complete the mission with a volunteer army.
Of course, you are right Matt. Your sagacity in these matters makes a valuable contribution to the dialogue.
VdaK, the other thing that might be of corollary insight here is the notion that the 1st Gulf War… the one waged by Powell & Bush 41… was mostly, largely free of casualties on the Coalition’s side. It was our first clean war after the grand and snappy British assault on the Malvinas Islands.
I think the 1st Gulf War and the coverage by the MSM of that war lulled Americans into believing that a tactical, surgical, “clean” war was going to be the norm from now on.
VdaK regrettably writes on target: “Or, would the left simply prefer to send unwilling men and women to die because their moral vanity won’t permit them to do those things I just listed?”
Unfortunately, the answer to your question is Yes.
#15, In all honesty, I think the left would prefer to do neither, but simply appease the terrorists well enough to preserve their lifestyle until they die.
I think the main reason EUrotopia has been so willing to appease the terrorists is because Europe is dying. Look at Europe’s birth rates. I think the elites figure they can keep their welfare states functioning for the rest of their lives, and don’t care what happens beyond that. They don’t care what happens to the next generation because they have largely failed to produce one.
And our blue state elites are very EUrotopian in their outlooks. Why make sacrifices, even the sacrifice of moral preening, for the benefit of other people’s children?
#8 Calling me a hatemonger is a challenge to my decency and integrity and a clear violation of the new commenting rules.
#11 “we could have laid waste to all of Iraq”
The last I heard, we were trying to liberate Iraq not obliterate it. Please make up your mind what you want to do. BTW, if you are going to nuke the Middle East, you’d better have plans to nuke Pakistan preemptively and plans to make do for a few decades without much Mideast oil. BTW, I’m not sure the Israelis want clouds of radioactive fallout coating their country.
Ian-
Nothing in comment #8 was a personal attack on you.
The comment rules are not designed to heighten your sensitivies.
PS – Dan and I will decide what violates the rules.
Anyone deciding to play “referee” on their own….. will be banned.
But, GP, in the interests of going above and beyond the rules to be civil, I hereby retract and apologize for my statement calling Ian a “leftist hatemonger”.
Ian, V the K said that we COULD have laid waste to Iraq, and he said that as evidence that we are the good guys because we did not do that. Your response was written as though he said we SHOULD have laid waste to Iraq.
#21: You’re right he didn’t say we should. But Bruce suggested bombing Iran with nukes and I sure get the impression that some if not all of you want to “take the gloves off.” The only way I can see us doing that is with either massive amounts of bombing or massive amounts of troops. So which is it?
A draft will not be necessary even if we’d have to take on Iran & North Korea provided we have a President and Congress that is willing to do what is necessary to defeat these terror sponsors and dictators.
The American people will be willing to defend our country when push comes to shove.
We will also have to defeat those who commit treason and sedition through long term prison sentences and executions too. I am willing to re-enlist when needed or to do the hard work that would be needed right here at home.
Right on, Ed. People forget that during World War II, all the 4F’s who could not fight on the battlefront made do on the homefront. Not to mention all the women who took up the slack in the factories when needed.
Regards,
Peter H.
Seems to me critics hold the USA and Israel to a different standard than they do the terrorists or in this case Hezbollah and or Lebanon. I didnt know that Hezbollah was launching 10-20 rockets daily into northern Israel for weeks before the new govt finally had enough when it lost one to three soldiers, where ever they were lost. When Israel hits back, now it’s a story, now it’s a war. To remind everyone…Sadaam had his people shooting at our jets in both no fly zones in Iraq. As part of the peace treaty when he LOST the war in 91 they agreed to no flys and to eliminate WMD’s. So when we decided to finally hit back when we had GWB in charge, all of a sudden, now it’s war. I submit the war was started long before Israel finally reacted and started bombing Lebanon. Just because the world didn’t notice Jews were being killed and injured doesn’t change the facts.
Also just a note, we were trying to “liberate” Japan from fascists too but we ended up using nuclear bombs to make a point. I heard a guy say maybe it’s been too long since Hiroshima. And most rogue nations don’t know enought to be afraid. As a lesson to many islamofascists countries would a symbolic mid east Hiroshima be appropriate?
Bruce, the WOT is real and today’s experience for me puts a human face on the reality and brings it home to my world. I finished a business meeting in downtown Dearborn this afternoon and a group of us decided to go grab some middle eastern food. FYI: I think Dearborn claims to be the largest concentration of Arab-Americans outside the Middle East? Middle East food -where better then?
The restaurant we picked turned out to be owned by a family that is deeply involved with Hezbollah and, apparently, other criminal activities.
http://freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060705/NEWS05/607050353
We were to meet in the parking lot behind a group of these restaurants and pick one… we met, the group picked a restaurant and off we went. While we waited in line, I overheard the arab family in front of us talking about “the scandal” and learned from them the story of the owners, his Hezbollah ties, and other tidbits I’ll skip.
I turned to our group and quietly asked if anyone knew about this… yep, but only the person who suggested it; she relayed a similar story but also tied in Tom Ridge and other former Bush Administration people “connected” with the owners.
I said that was enough for me and I was out of there with regrets… the group followed in about 4 minutes and we ate great Irish food about 3 blocks away. The woman who suggested the restaurant said she was sorry but it was good food and that’s what really mattered. I didn’t debate her –she’s voting for Stabenow and there’s no reasoning with that kind of person.
When my parents used to say “It’s a small world”, I had no idea of how small. Terrorists just down the street? Nawh, couldn’t happen in America.
Peter Hughes #24 comment: I am a 50 year old man this year, served 20 years US Army 1975-1976 already. I am willing if needed to re-enlist or man the prisons where the cowards will be held.
I am not trying to toot my own horn, but don’t assume people aren’t ready to serve if needed.
What are you willing to do to defend freedom in the world?
1975-1996…
[Comment deleted]
Bruce states: “It is time for a war to be waged on all fronts in World War III. A war where there is nothing demanded of our enemies (nations and their terror-backed groups alike) except total and unconditional surrender.”
I have yet to see anyone grab the bull by the horns and suggest how we go about doing this. Few if any think a draft will be necessary but don’t explain how we get enough soldiers to do what’s required. No one seems really willing to nuke the Muslim world into submission – all I see is a lot of arm-waving and a lot of macho talk but no real concrete and viable ideas.
BTW: WWIII? Why not WWIV? Wasn’t the Cold War III?
At any rate, we are not in a world war. Countries are not invading each other for the purpose of acquiring territory.
What we are in is more similar to the Cold War. Its primarily a war of ideology, not military combat.
Ian, maybe it’s just that no one here is going to nibble at your bait-and-switch tactic? You can read the comments of others about the need for a draft… something you implied was required in order to wage a serious campaign against the terrorists. At least that part of your misdirection was answered.
With all due respect… you asked what needed to be done?
Here’s a thought for you: maybe we need to get off the backs of the Bush Administration in its effort to root out the financial and organizational schemes of terrorist cells?
Maybe we need to allow black ops to occur to take out known terrorist leaders?
Maybe we need to keep the terrorists at GitMo locked up and not give them the benefit of American or military justice?
Maybe the Democrats need to elect strong leaders who support the WOT like Joe Lieberman?
Maybe the moderate Democrats need to take back their party and kick the anti-war people out?
Maybe the GayLeft needs to stand against groups like CodePink and others for being accomplices of the enemy in the WOT?
Maybe we need to elect more pro-WOT advocates to the House? the Senate? the WH in 2008?
In short, Ian, maybe you need to start doing some of the things many here have repeatedly suggested to you and others. That’s what’s REALLY needed, Ian. For you to write: “I have yet to see anyone grab the bull by the horns and suggest how we go about doing this” is to prove you still have your Democrat Plantation blinders securely in place and the donkey your riding is heading back to the Plantation… only you’re riding it backwards. “Real or conrete ideas…”???? Are YOU serious, Ian?
I don’t think you could be more seriously messed up or mistaken.
People here have written volumes about what should be done.
It’s not their fault you reduce those ideas to “arm waving” and “macho-talk”.
I know what you would do if you were in a position of power over the WOT. You’d first set up a calendar for the Cut & Run party. Then you’d demean the effort of the Free World up to that point as a “failure”. Then you’d go back to spending the “Cut & Run Iraq/WOT” dividend on a long list of social programs even Slick Willy wouldn’t touch.
Ian, people here have been very clear about what ought to be done on the WOT. Bruce’s call and others’ have been to ratchet up the effort and play tough.
That’s why we MUST support Israel now. MUST, Ian. No quibbles. MUST.
You simply don’t get it and what’s at stake. It’s a shame you think this is still some late night frat beer party and you’re the little polisci major holding court after we’re done talking sports. It’s a shame.
One step at a time. We could begin by letting Israel finish off Hamas and Hezbullah without all the whining about
human shield“civilian” casualties. We could help Israel wipe out Hamas and Hezbullah and stop condemning Israel for taking prudent steps to secure its security that would go unquestioned if any other civilized nation had 1,600 missiles fired on its cities.We could go onto develop bunker-busting tactical nukes, and use them on Iran’s nuclear facilities (and North Korea) … even if it means $5 a gallon gas. And on that note, we could open up ANWR and the Gulf of Mexico to drilling so we don’t need as much foreign oil, as well as speed the development of alternative fuels including nuclear.
We could rescind Executive Order 11905 and begin targeted assassinations of heads-of-state and other foreign supporters of terrorists. And, since the UN has proven itself to be an enabler of terror and an obstacle to fighting terror, we should withdraw.
Note: Lefties would oppose almost all of these measures. Not also, the political will to carry out these actions would obviate the need for a draft.
I can see where someone who was, for example, a childless, middle-aged gay atheist would be unwilling to make any sacrifice to fight this war because to such a person, the path of least resistance would be to appease terrorists in return for living out the rest of one’s life in the illusion of peace. After all, to such a person’s perspective, history effectively ends when one dies, and the oppression of future generations under shariah or fighting a much worse, much bloodier, much delayed war… are not really of concern.
VdaK, good points all.
Of course, the GayLeft would support a surgical strike from 35,000 ft of an aspirin factory though… strong men all.
#33: There isn’t a SINGLE thing you mention that the anti-war crowd has prevented the Bush Adminstration from doing. Not one. Republicans control the White House and both houses of Congress and have had carte blanche since 9/11 to fight the “WOT” any way they saw fit. The problem is they have been incompetent and still are. Look at Condi – what a joke. First she says no cease fire then she says maybe it’s a good idea. Then the government of Lebanon tells her to in effect buzz off. No wonder the Arab-Israeli conflict has intensified – after all, it was Bush who washed his hands of the whole affair almost immediately after entering the White House.
Meanwhile Bush entertains American Idol contestants at the White House last week while the Mideast goes down the drain. Now I suppose he’ll be off for a month’s vacation. And the best you can do is blame the hapless and powerless Dems?
And cut and run from Mogadishu.
And “prevent” North Korea from getting the bomb by allowing them to get nuclear reactor technology.
And vote for the war before they vote against it and still later claim that they have a secret, detail-less “plan” for winning…
Ah… the old “Bush is away from the White House therefore he’s on vacation” canard.
I rarely read Ian and raj anymore cos of their sock puppetry, but it’s refreshing to see Ian at least realizes the Dems are “hapless and powerless”. Except for one thing my friend. They are still able to destroy a united front against terrorism and destroy the American will to take down this enemy now and not after 3000 or 30, 000 more American deaths. I’m positive more, or even all the terrorists, would have rolled over by now if they saw a united America and a united west that was prepared to stop at nothing to wipe them out.
#39: “prepared to stop at nothing to wipe them out.”
Big talk but just what are you prepared to do? Flatten entire countries? Whatever happened to spreading freedom and democracy?
just what are you prepared to do? Flatten entire countries? Whatever happened to spreading freedom and democracy?
The freedom and democracy in Japan and Germany were accomplished by flattening those countries first.
True, Bush isn’t doing enough to fight the terrorists, nor is he using the most effective means to fight the terrorists and deter their overlords.
Also true, the Democrat-opposition whines constantly about what Bush is already doing, and offers nothing but appeasement or vague pledges to do something else as an alternative, all the while actively undermining intelligence operations and support for what is being done. There is also the media, who wants to turn the fight against terrorism into another Vietnam, because when America loses, the left wins.
[Comment deleted.]
Ah… the old “Bush is away from the White House therefore he’s on vacation” canard.
Some people haven’t yet grasped that thanks to this thing called ‘technology,’ one can now conduct one’s business from a variety of locations.
#41 John in IL — August 1, 2006 @ 1:09 am – August 1, 2006
The freedom and democracy in Japan and Germany were accomplished by flattening those countries first.
Hardly. It has been reported that during WWII only on the order of 5% of the industrial infrastructure of Germany was destroyed, irrespective of the Allied bombings of the central cities.
In point of fact, the destruction of some of the major cities in Germany during WWII allowed them to rebuild in a grand way. Example: the rubble of much of the old central city of Munich–the “Altstadt–which had been largely bombed to smithereens, largely lies under the Olypiastadt, the site of the 1972 Olympics. The bombing of Munich gave rise to a rebuilt, modern Munich, with a mass transit system that would put any American city to shame. And just how many American cities have experienced a renaissance and rebuilding since WWII?
Flattened? No.
raj, can have it nine ways –like a cat. First, there\’s the murderous and odious fire bombing of Dresden… bad allies, that. Then there\’s the wholesale slaughter of innocents by deliberate insufficient humanitarian aid in the months right after Germans capitualted in dishonor.
Now, it\’s a new game. We didn\’t even hurt 5% of the German infrastructure… those silly incompetent allies who WON the war.
Right raj. Only in your German fantasyland of citizenship lust can you contend such silliness and see it as real. Frankly, raj, there are no citations which will help you understand how wrong your view is… like with many other uninformed opinions you hold as truth or present as fact.
[Comment edited.]
#41: “The freedom and democracy in Japan and Germany were accomplished by flattening those countries first.”
So that is what you’re suggesting we do in the Middle East? Stop beating around the bush.
#45 Michigan-Matt — August 1, 2006 @ 9:52 am – August 1, 2006
Oh, so, let me understand this. You do not deny any of the facts that I recited in my previous comment. The 5% figure came from John Ardagh\’s book Germany and the Germans, a pre-Wiedervereinigung book.
[Comment edited.]
Almost missed this. Jules Crittendon of the Boston Herald? I hate–not really–to tell you, but the fact is that the Boston Herald is largely approaching bankrupty. Not even Rupert Murdoch, when he owned the Herald, could revive it.
Believe what you wish about what is reported in the Boston Herald. Some of us, who are actually from the area, know better.
[Comment deleted.]
Boston is in Germany?
That wouldn’t surprise me, though.
#51 Frank IBC — August 1, 2006 @ 11:09 am – August 1, 2006
Boston is in Germany? That wouldn’t surprise me, though.
No, Boston is not in Germany. Pay attention to the dialog.
raj, yes I dispute your “facts” that the Allies “only” destroyed about “5%” of Germany’s infrastructure. It’s a silly bit of nonsense filled with half-truths which fail on face value.
It doesn’t get any simpler than that.
But we’re way, way off topic now and it’s entirely inappropriate to the other readers of this thread and the blog hosts. So I’ll stop.
#53 Michigan-Matt — August 1, 2006 @ 12:31 pm – August 1, 2006
raj, yes I dispute your “facts” that the Allies “only” destroyed about “5%” of Germany’s infrastructure. It’s a silly bit of nonsense filled with half-truths which fail on face value
That’s sweet. Another fact- and citation free comment by someone who, only a few weeks ago, was contending that FDRoosevelt was complicitous in the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
raj, you may have the last word. I said I would stop. I have. A little civility and maturity is in order.
LOL….Raj, it is commonly-accepted fact that 70% of Europe’s industrial capacity was destroyed in World War II. Germany was, in all respects, the “industrial giant” of Europe, and it stretches the bounds of even the most remote of credibilities to claim that only 5% of their infrastructure was destroyed. Add to that other things such as bridges, canals, railroads, dams, roads, and fuel/chemical storage, and said statement completely lacks in logic.
I have long since abandoned the notion that a dialogue of any signifigance may be had with the other half of this republic. Rather than seek common ground, the American Castrati have, time and again, demonstrated that their disdain for any opposition whatsoever constitutes the core of their vision for the future.
In other words: They hate, ergo they’re right. Apparently, we’re all fools; sheeple incapable of independant thought. Who knew, right?
Conversely, the noble (albeit, foolish & futile) attempts by conservative commentators on this blog to engage the opposition in such discourse are accomplishing nothing more than the casting of pearls before swine. They don’t get it, nor do they care to. When your opposition is convinced that absolutely nothing you believe holds water, a meaningful discussion becomes an impossibility.
As for me, I’m sick of the whole damned thing.
Everyone knows of the precocious child who insists upon learning the “whys” of all things. Such a child needs these answers in order to find their place in the world. We as adults often do the same. Unfortunately, the constant (ahem) inquiries from the liberals on this blog bear no such resemblence. Rather, these tactics are designed only to provoke rancor, and to date, they’ve proven to be far more effective than many of us would have believed possible.
Get with the program, people. You’re being toyed with by individuals who apparently lack the resources to debate you in truth.
I’m out.
Eric in Hollywood
Humor us, Eric; in my philosophical opinion, at least, the struggle for the cause is more important than the outcome.
In addition, from a practical point of view, the more that people see that RajIan and their cohorts do not represent all gays, the less likely they will be to judge us by our sexual orientation — and instead concentrate on our behavior.
The RajIans of the world have made it clear that being gay should trump morality, decency, good behavior, and educational and workplace competence. We intend to show otherwise.
You know NDXXX, it seems to me that what the GayLeft really wants is a kind of 21stC “Affirmative Action” program based on their agenda.
They think they somehow become not-rich-white-males. It would be funny if it weren’t so pathetic.
#28 – Ed, I am already doing my part by being politically and socially active, and keeping the homefront safe through my own means.
Thank you for your service to our country in its time of war.
Regards,
Peter H.
Review this damage and then tell us that it only equals 5% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#Effectiveness
As it notes German war production rose but not nearly at the rate of Allied (largely not bombed) production.
BTW, this suggests the Germany should repay us for the costs we incurred while performing our generous and progressive aerial urban renewal campaign.
RajIan should give the 7th Air Force a big danke shout out.
BWT, I checked out the definitive reference “Germany and the Germans” that RajIan referred to. As the single Amazon review of the book says “Sort of an everyday life in Germany. No Pictures or plats and few statistics.
The author is more of an expert on France but also wrote this book on Germany. ” Now thats what I call citing an irrefutable giant in his field!
Another measure of the value of this sacred tome is that it can be had for 16 cents. Plus shipping of course.
.#47 So that is what you’re suggesting we do in the Middle East? Stop beating around the bush
Ian, my comment was in response to your comment in response to Gene in PA’s concise comment in #39:
Not sure how I was beating around the bush but to answer your question and to remove any doubt in your mind: YES. The enemy has to realize they are defeated(flattened) or they will continue to fight..
#64: Well John, thank you for your honesty at least.
BoBo writes: “BWT, I checked out the definitive reference “Germany and the Germans” that RajIan referred to. As the single Amazon review of the book says “Sort of an everyday life in Germany. No Pictures or plats and few statistics. The author is more of an expert on France but also wrote this book on Germany. ” Now thats what I call citing an irrefutable giant in his field!”
Ouch. Triple ouch. Nothing hurts like the truth.
#63 BoBo — August 1, 2006 @ 8:11 pm – August 1, 2006
BWT, I checked out the definitive reference “Germany and the Germans” that RajIan referred to. As the single Amazon review of the book says…
Oh, so, let me understand. Amazon reviews are authoritative–except when they aren’t.
Recall that a couple of weeks ago, I had pooh-poohed a review of John Lott books on Amazon because they had been posted by Lott himself under a pseudonym. Others here suggested that Amazon reviews aren’t authoritative. So, now you are claiming that one is.
Interesting.
Quit biting at BoBo’s heel, Raj, and answer the question: given that Germany was the “industrial giant” of Europe, yet numerous sources cite that over 70% of Europe’s industrial infrastructure was destroyed in World War II, how do you maintain your fictitious belief that only 5% of Germany’s was?
#67 RajIan – Perhaps you can convince us why a book about Germany, written by an Englishman who specialializes in “life in France” books, should be accepted as a definative source for assessing WWII Allied bomb damage to the German industrial infrastructure. I suggest that in future you cite sources that are actually directly related to the “facts” that you offer.
However I was reading my Jaguar owners manual today and was interested to discover that over 98% of German lawyers pick their nose and wear mismatched clothing, so go figure.
Eile folgen jenem Krankenwagen!
#69 BoBo — August 3, 2006 @ 5:05 pm – August 3, 2006
Eile folgen jenem Krankenwagen!
Ihr Deutsch hat sich nicht verbessert. Das ist ganz komisch.
Let’s see. Two verbs, “eilen” and “folgen.” Dative “jenem,” used with an indirect object. Doesn’t work.
“Schnell! Folgen Sie den Krankewagen!” might work. “Fast! Follow the ambulence!” Accusative “den” is used with the direct object “Krankenwagen.” “Folgen Sie” is, of course the imperative.
Your German lesson of the day.
Further to #70, an alternative might be “Beeilen Sie sich!” instead of “Schnell!” (“hurry up” instead of “quickly”)
“Eile” might be useful as a verb form in Konjunktiv 1, but it’s difficult to figure out how it might otherwise be used.
Thanks for the lesson. Communicating with you in your native language helps the flow of ideas. However you seem to be avois my question in #69 regarding your apparently less than sound reference to Germany and the Germans.
Did someone just say:
“I am a jelly doughnut!” ?
monty
#73 monty — August 5, 2006 @ 12:00 am – August 5, 2006
Did someone just say:
“I am a jelly doughnut!” ?
If by “just” you mean 45 years (or so) ago 😉