As Victor Davis Hanson points out…. what’s old is what’s new again! Welcome again to the Jimmy Carterian World of appeasement and the coddling of tyranny.
Yet if some think the strange alliance between the new Democratic Congressional majorities and old Republican realists will ameliorate some of this by urging direct talks with North Korea, Iran, and Syria, pressuring Israel, gravitating to a European approach to problems, or withdrawing from Iraq, they should remember the Carter administration’s experience with Iran, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Central America, and the Clinton response to the first World Trade Center bombing, Khobar Towers, the East African embassy bombings, and the USS Cole. Even more illuminating is to remember that the old appeasement of treating numerous enemies better than our few friends did not even win affection, but only outright contempt. I remember the visceral Iranian hatred for Jimmy Carter, and the worldwide ridicule of Bill Clinton, and sad US shuttles of the 1990s to beseech Assad and Arafat.
So we are in strange time, in which we see the known failures of the past offered up as correctives for the perceived failures of the present. In response, what the administration needs to do is to nominate someone from the uncompromising Bolton stamp who pursues UN reform, rethink tactics in Iraq to secure the country, renew diplomatic efforts to isolate Iran and foster internal change, continue the investigations and pressures on Syria, and craft an energy policy that collapses the world price of petroleum and with it the juice that powers a Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Putin, et al.
My friends, how many Americans must die on our nation’s soil before our elected leaders get serious in this World War against Islamic terror?
Frankly, I’ve lost all hope that Democrats/Liberals ever will take the war seriously. After all, it is so much easier to sit by and allow your fellow citizens to die, rather than stand up for your country and fight. Just as long as you have an election issue for the next campaign cycle.
Harsh, you say? Not really. The evidence is pretty clear that those on the Left (Democrats and the American news media) are actively helping the terrorists’ goals to defeat America.
Democrats’ devious deeds are too numerous to be fully recounted, but here at least are some of the highlights:
- They have tried to prevent us from listening on terrorists’ phone calls
- They have sought to stop us from properly interrogating captured terrorists
- They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists’ financial transactions
- They have revealed the existence of secret national security programs
- They have opposed vital components of the Patriot Act
- They have sought to confer unmerited legal rights on terrorists
- They have opposed profiling to identify the terrorists in our midst
- They have impugned and demeaned our military
- They have insinuated that the president is a war criminal
- They have forced the resignation of a committed defense secretary
- They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort
- They want to quit the battlefield in the midst of war.
To see just how bad things really are, ponder this question: If the terrorists were represented by a party in our political system, how would their foreign policy program substantially differ from that of the present-day Democrats?
As I have said many times to those of you who think I’m hyperbolic on this point…. Prove me wrong with EVIDENCE of Democrats supporting America in this World War.
*crickets chirping*
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
How can anyone ever fault your comments. I have lost all respect of Democrats since Jimmy Carter caved to the Iranians and did not go full force on them for attacking American soil. Yes for those (DEmocrats) that do not know it American embassies are American soil. And let us not forget dear bill and black hawk down. We should have wiped the place up instead of withdrawing with no payback. I guess I just see all Democrats as nothing more than sunshine Patriots.
I’m also trying to think of a way in which Democrat leaders have helped the War on Terror – other than passive, opportunistic stuff like being-for-the-war-and-the-87-billion-before-they-were-against-it.
Nothing springs to mind.
Many individuals fighting the GWOT are, of course, Democrats (or Republicans or whatever). That’s not what you’re talking about; you meant leaders / policies / leaks / etc.
I was going through your listing and noticed some typos:
* They have tried to prevent us from listening on terrorists’ and innocent people’s phone calls without a warrant
* They have sought to stop us from properly
interrogatingtorturing captured and suspected terrorists and innocent people mistakenly captured* They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists’ financial transactions without a warrant
* The
ymedia ha[s] revealed the existence of secret national security programs,revealing radical ideas like wiretapping and financial record reviews, things the terrorists had, like, no idea we were doing.I’m sure you can complete the rest of the worksheet without help.
torrentprime:
Stop, you’re breakin’ my heart.
Julie the Jarhead
torrentprime, no wonder the enemies of liberty are winning the WOT –rather than just be their cheerleader, why not step out into the fray, pick up your cheap seat sloganeering and stand in the line of fire from the terrorists you’re so keen on protecting? And clean out the ACLU’s World Hdqtrs in DC and NYC when you go, ok?
With “Americans” like you, who needs the enemy?
People who talk to terrorists on the phone aren’t innocent, numbnuts.
torrentpine apparently had to consult with his Dear Leaders at DK before he posted…
I’m surprised the little coward took so long to post.
Hmmmm.
They have tried to prevent us from listening on terrorists’ and innocent people’s phone calls without a warrant.
And, torrentprime, despite the fact that I was driving at the speed limit and in a responsible fashion, with insurance and with my licenses both up to date, I was radar-gunned and observed by no less than four law enforcement officers on my drive to work yesterday.
In fact, even today, when I took mass transit, I was recorded visually and audibly on the bus, viewed by the station cameras, checked by the conductors, and observed by the transit police officer on my arriving platform — all despite being completely innocent.
And if that’s not enough……..
They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists’ financial transactions without a warrant.
You know, over Thanksgiving, when I went to Chicago, my credit card provider called me and asked me to verify my location — because they had monitored my financial transactions and were concerned that my card was being fraudulently used — even though I was quite innocently going about my business and have a gold-plated record with them.
The reason the police and my financial provider do those things is simple; even though they know that they are going to see lots of innocent people, they also know that, if they don’t, people will drive like maniacs and use stolen credit cards with impunity — with the end result being deaths, injuries, and millions of dollars in financial and property damage.
Do you really think terrorists are any different?
And finally:
They media ha[s] revealed the existence of secret national security programs,revealing radical ideas like wiretapping and financial record reviews, things the terrorists had, like, no idea we were doing.
Oh, they had an idea that we were doing it, just as I know that the CHP is monitoring 280 and the 101 for speeders and people driving recklessly. However — and this is key — if I know exactly where, how, and how often the CHP is monitoring, I also know exactly where they’re not — and where I can test the upper limits of my car’s engine without worrying in the slightest about being caught.
It’s a bit like illegal immigrants; the reason San Francisco has so many of them is because they are more than aware that city ordinances prevent police officers or other city officials from enforcing or supporting the enforcement of Federal immigration laws. Our clueless district attorney still can’t figure out why drug trafficking, abuse, and gang killings have spiked since she publicly proclaimed that her office would not prosecute “minor” drug offenses or seek the maximum penalty for homicides.
Our laws are a social contract, torrentprime; you enjoy the protections that our form of limited government provides, but in exchange, you promise not to take advantage of them and violate the law when you’re not being watched. You are expected to follow speed limits even when there isn’t a radar gun on you simply because they’re there; you shouldn’t need to be watched constantly in order for you to obey the law.
The terrorists broke that social contract. As a result, we no longer can assume that others are not doing exactly the same thing. It’s a shame that we have to do that, but the simple fact of the matter is that overlooking it will only result in the deaths of more Americans.
NDT….your comments are always very interesting and invariably spot on. The posters like “torrentpine” who whine so much about the supposed loss of our liberties seem to me to be the ones who do not have the backbone to standup for them and will be the first to howl when they are gone. But what the hell do I know?
It will probably take another 9/11 to wake up the appeasement crowd!
nice to you the conservative dinosaurs in here are still babbling away.
According to “markie” ….. concern about your nation’s security is “babbling away.”
And we should trust people like him and those he votes for to protect us?
Funny, because as time goes by, more conservatives are agreeing with the same points you mention.
actually, it wasn’t “they” who got rid of rumsfeld, the people did that. You remember the people? the citiznes of this country who our officials are supposed to serve? Bush was literally a day late and dollar short when Bush fired him. If that guy had a more a of a brain, he would have dumped rumsfeld weeks earlier and then maybe more republicans would have won.
And if all you “patriots” support the war, then how come you’re not on active military duty?
I guess no one is responding due to your radical hostility to reason when considering the best way to deal with the situation.
Despite what Democrats may or may not have done, there are a few things that are very clear. One is that it’s due to Republican interests that we’re in Iraq to begin with. Second is that it’s due to poor Republican leadership that we now find ourselves, faced with defeat and few options to salvage the effort. You should thank the American people for having the better sense to remove your party from majority to save you from yourselves.
Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, John Kerry…
And Bush continues to lose the war.
JAQ (#13): “the best way to deal with the situation”
….and coming from your party, that’d be…?
(crickets still chirping)
Caralato says:
No Caralato, I think Bruce is perfectly willing to spit on members of our military and call them baby-killers, not for doing a tour in Iraq of course, but for being Democrats. And I know some of his cohorts, NDT for example, have declared them fair game in their dirty little war.
Bruce is a fraud. The War on Terror is not and never has been his primary concern. Rather his primary interest is in his own personal War on Democrats/Liberals/Whatever.
And all the referenced and linked “evidence” that anyone needs is located on the left side of this page in the archives. The majority of his posts on the War on Terror, or actually on anything else for that matter, are primarily dedicated to the War on Democrats. He simply uses the WoT to attempt to assume an undue position of moral superiority. His main point in any post is always “Kill the Wabbit” …err the Democrat. If you go back and read the archives, as a whole, this pattern is repeated endlessly, it is crystal clear.
Its morally contemptible of course, but the evidence speaks for itself. In a sense, its why we are losing the War in Iraq now, political considerations by those in power always came first before winning the actual war, no matter what side of the aisle they are from. If it were polticaly advantageous for the GOP to oppose the War on Terror, they would be right out in front, and Bruce would be leading the charge. Right off the edge of the cliff.
Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt! Wrong answer, Gryph.
Spitting on our military members and calling them the equivalent of baby-killers (“torturers” is your preferred meme) is your area, remember? As we have seen on this blog, too many times to distinguish individually. (Just google ‘gaypatriot gryph torture’)
Amazingly, you also try it on military blogs (Blackfive etc.) and get your ass kicked there as well.
And if Bruce is so awful – Why on earth would you ever have a reason to visit here? Your very presence tells a different story. (Not to mention the personal envy, desperation, etc. on display in your “contributions”).
And once again, you feel the need to lie about NDT. Tell you what, Gryph: Why not just start in some lies about me now? You know you wanna 😉
What kind of post is this?
Because you disagree with libs you charge dems are “actively helping the terrorists’ goals to defeat America.”
Then you list a bunch of things that you disagree with because of your ideology. For example, many people feel that getting rid of Rummy was the best thing Bush has done to win this war.
Then you say “Prove Me Wrong”
Have we entered the era of loyalty tests?
If we have, indeed the terrorist have already won,
It appears it is your reactionary response to terrorism that is “helping the terrorist win.”
#17 P.S.: The logical end, or logical essence, of your claim that Iraq was all about “political considerations first” would have to be that Bushco did Iraq to be, um, popular.
I could try for some sort of wisecrack about “Didn’t work too well for them did it?”, or some such – but instead, let’s just leave it that the raw absurdity of your claim should not require additional explanation or comment from me.
Heya Gryph, glad to see the meds are starting to work for you –these comments aren’t nearly as negative and hate filled spew-fests that you’ve become famous for here. But, I think you need to get the eye prescription checked –his name is Calarato, not Caralato. I would think someone like you who fails to tilt at the windmill so often would at least get the guy’s name right.
Of course, we now have to add “blog envy” to the list of personal character faults you present in these comments.
A word about “fraud”. Bruce and other conservative commenters here would be the last –if ever– to cast scorn on those in military service just because of their partisan leanings. You, on the other hand, are a well known, self-professed religious and GOP bigot. I think your suggestion that Bruce would spit on the military in order to advance petty partisan gain is a classic, text book example of PROJECTION on your feeble part, Gryph.
You’re the one who scorns the military and willingly sees them as torturers and miscreants and bigots and homophobes if it will help you advance your partisan agenda. I think it stems from your bias against the GOP –you realize that the majority of military troops and leadership are likely GOP, likely conservative and that irks you to no end. Couple that with their lack of support for your pet DADTDHDP repeal efforts and you’ve become a frustrated, bitter, greying, overweight, out-of-step, out-of-tune military wanna be… who also needs to get his eyes checked, btw.
Nope Gryph, you’re the one who routinely spits on the military for petty partisan gain. To suggest that both parties would use the WOT and Iraq for partisan gain is like saying the MSM isn’t biased, the 2006 elections were a mandate for Democrats, and Hollywood just repreesents mainstream American values. All lies, Gryph.
The only fraud is you, Gryph. Not Bruce. Not Dan. Not Nick or Joe. Not the commenters here from the middle or right spectrum. Let’s remember, those of a conservative bent around here aren’t the ones using multiple names to post and reinforce their own comments with seeming assent. The fraud is in your projection that Bruce would spit on the troops because of their partisan leaning. That’s the fraud; it’s all yours. It’s all about your projections.
#20 – Matt, LOL – Gryph’s never getting my right doesn’t bother me. In fact it works as a reflection on him, as you point out 🙂
#18 – keogh, to answer your question, “What kind of post is this?”
It’s a post that
(1) points out how the policies advocated by Democrat leaders are, in fact, policies designed to appease terrorists rather than destroy them; and
(2) quotes a list of specific, verifiable ways in which Democrats have worked directly against American efforts to defeat terrorists.
What you do with it after that, is up to you. If it feels to you like an indictment of your politics: perhaps that’s a sign, not that Bruce is evil or that America is fascist, but that your politics may merit some type of indictment?
#21
What you call “specific, verifiable” is spin put through the rightist ideological filter.
For example, many people think that getting rid of Rummy is a great way to start the path to victory.
Or they think a change of strategy in Iraq might be a good thing.
etc etc
And Cal, you are wrong about the intentions of this post; it is simply a call for a loyalty test.
And we are not asked to be loyal to our country, but to the ideological spin that you rightists laughably call “verifiable”
To maintain the consistency that you rightists cherish, it looks like you will should start demanding a loyalty test from Gates and Baker.
I look forward to that post.
Unless of course you bump it because Nancy P. wore a plaid suit….
I’ve tried to post to this thread twice, Bruce, but to no avail.
It galls me to think that you and Dan continue to condone the intellectual dishonety and sheer, unadulterated crap being spewed forth by our little friends on the left, but wish to censor me when I call them to account for it.
If I’m wrong, then please feel free to correct me.
LOL….it’s OK, HNC, they’re not censoring you. There was a new spam filter installed a few weeks ago, and it’s catching things indiscriminately. I’ve had a few posts of mine vanish as well; it’s exasperating, but also necessary, given that the latest tactic among leftists to shut down blogs like these is to direct spammers to them.
GP and GPW are usually very good about clearing the filters regularly; your posts will make it out there sooner or later.
My thanks, NDXXX. I was getting a little concerned, because I can post with impunity on other threads here, and haven’t experienced the filters yet.
I guess I’m in good company then, considering that SondraK and my Dear Vera Charles have had to deal with it!
No Caralato, I think Bruce is perfectly willing to spit on members of our military and call them baby-killers, not for doing a tour in Iraq of course, but for being Democrats. And I know some of his cohorts, NDT for example, have declared them fair game in their dirty little war.
Mhm, yup.
I’m hoping the third time I’ve said this will be a charm, Gryph: the fact that Benedict Arnold was a veteran, a war hero, and a very successful general did not prevent him from being a traitor, nor should it have protected him from being condemned and ostracized by the American public.
My personal belief is that bullets and bombs don’t differentiate by political affiliation, so it really matters not how our servicepeople vote or what their individual affinities are. But what I will NEVER tolerate is people who exploit our society’s general respect for the military and those who served in it for their own aggrandizement and enrichment.
That goes for Duke Cunningham, who is right where he deserves to be, and it goes for John Kerry, Max Cleland, Jim Webb, and other Democratic politicians, who are using public sympathy for veterans in support of a party that utterly loathes and despises the military.
I thought it was the other way around as it hit me as well on other threads.
Matt said:
That just sank in. Matt, spot on. The person we’ve seen spit on the troops around here in the past, is Gryph with the “torture” crap. We also constantly see him spit on people because of their perceived (in my case, mis-perceived) partisan leanings. Finally, longtime readers know how readily Gryph accuses others of his own visible behaviors. Your 1 sentence ties it all together.
Crickets gloriously chirp because your “World War” label has an audience of 17 people.
“the latest tactic among leftists”… Riotously funny.
I’ve run up against the spam censor quite a few times. Seems to happen most often when i’m using multiple hyperlinks in a post.
The misspelling is deliberate. Thats because in my native language “Calarato” translates into something so obscene I’d get banned instantly for describing it.
Thats because in my native language “Calarato” translates into something so obscene I’d get banned instantly for describing it.
Too convenient of an explanation, Gryph.
Why don’t you tell us your native language, and then we can look up the translation ourselves?
ROTFLMAO 🙂
Indeed, Gryph. Have enough courage of your convictions to tell us. I’m certain you can find language clinical or neutral enough to avoid the ban you fear.
P.S.
No one has ever asked, but I’ll spill this much: “Calarato” means “wise guy” in a certain language. Not saying what it is. Yes, I did choose it as a joke on myself, i.e., with that language & meaning in mind.
jimmy carter wasn’t an appeaser. he fought for israels right to exist at camp david and he refused to support the Shah, a repressive monarch dictator.
and we aren’t goingt o appease victor david hanson and his neo con bretheren a moment longer.
AMERICA FIRST
Lester,
Vickey D Hanson is best to be defined as a wanker with no intellectual standing to criticize anyone.
In the same sentence he says he wants a leader to be:
“uncompromising” but wants to “rethink tactics” and then wants to “renew diplomatic efforts”
So basically he wants someone to continually contradict himself
There is no native language, it was a joke. Thanks for proving yet again that fanatics have no sense of humor.
One of these days, Gryph, I look forward to you claiming something is a joke PRIOR to it bombing, not after.
jimmy carter wasn’t an appeaser. he fought for israels right to exist at camp david and he refused to support the Shah, a repressive monarch dictator.
Mhm — by demanding that Israel give away the Sinai, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and all the settlements therein, all of which Israel won AFTER defeating Arab forces who attacked it.
And when it comes to the Shah, Carter’s National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski repeatedly told the Shah that the United States would back him, even up to the point of invading. Some “refused”.
#39 – And if VDH didn’t ever rethink tactics (in his genuine and uncompromising support of the fight against Islamo-fascism), keogh would be screeching against him for that. It’s the act of screeching that matters to keogh; content not required.
#41 – Well NDT, he was embarassed by Matt catching him in the long-term misspelling.
#38 / #42 – Looks like lester needs to read yesterday’s condemnation of Jimmy Carter’s Israel-bashing and Israel-hating by a top professor who had once counted Carter an ally.
p.s. I know you lefties are click-challenged, so here’s a hot graf for you:
But if you want to find out who the professor is (such that his criticism does matter, or carry weight), I am going to make you do the click.
And one of these days…
Bruce may actually decide to engage the wholesale bullsh*t he allows the left to vomit onto this site, as oppsed to censoring the one simple question I have asked from those of us who have a familial stake in this war.
What’ll it be Bruce? My brother, SFC Michael Olsen, 2nd Infantry Division, would gladly ask them himself, but seeing as how he is neither gay, nor available to wile away his days on a blog, he’s encouraged me to ask in his stead.
Your answer, sir?
*crickets chirping, Bruce*
” the conservative dinosaurs in here are still babbling away.”
Most comically. The list of Democrats “devious deeds” should be mailed post-haste to the Daily Show. “They have forced the resignation of a committed defense secretary.” I love that. I guess the dominatrix Nancy Pelosi whipped Rummy into submission and forced him, two days before his resignation, to sign a document that reads like Dr. Seuss’ assessment of the Iraq conflict. “They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort” — the one more than 60 percent of Americans and 90 percent of the world’s foreign leaders regard as illegitmate. It was Nancy and Harry done it!
“They have impugned and demeaned our military,” even though the troops themselves oppose the Iraq occupation and one reporter after another, including a Wall Street Journal one, have reported that the troops don’t regard the wish to get them the hell out of there as “demeaning.”
“Interrogating captured terrorists?” LOL! Is quizzing a man whom you are subjecting to dog bites or waterboarding “interrogation”? Not according to the Geneva Accords. But just in case it’s a problem, we’ll send the, um, interrogators to prison — and leave them there even after a memo by Rummy authorizing the behavior is disclosed.
This board is an amazing example of the wingnuts disregard for the truth.
Oh and by the way, the War on Christmas is conducted by Democrats who want to intall Muslim creches in town squares.
No, dear Jonathan”G” (as though the :G: were actually meant to stand for something.
You see, dear pissant, your worldview has become as accepted as, dare I say, the PC islamist bullsh*It you have chosen to ofrego, in favor of a more sexy disdain of the country that allows you to pursue your next affair through a glory hole.
You, dear Jonathan “G”, have become that which you purport to despise. Namely, any semblence of loyalty to that which pays for your next Grey Goose Martini.
You, dear Jonathan “G”, are a relic in and of yourself. Petulant swipes at the people who allow you the freedom to ejaculate yourself into whatever barfly you deign worthy of your wretched seed are the same people who may, one day, save your sorry ass from being drawn and quartered, just like the unfortunate young gay man discussed in another thread here.
Or were you just too busy being enraged at the President to be bothered with such trifles, you piece of self-involved sh*t?
Bruce, I do believe you need to respond to my repeated attempts to reach you via email immediately.
If you wish to ban me, then do so, but kindly do NOT patronize me by selectively posting my comments.
If you wish to continue enabling the left’s dersire to drag us all down into dhimmitude, then do me a favor and ban me now. Your seemingly consistent surrender to ignorance and dishonesty notwithstanding, I’ve always maintained that this blog encouraged the free exchange of ideas, even if said ideas were borne of leftist imbeciles. I see now, however, that your tolerance for debate only reaches so far.
You’ll no doubt excuse my posting this in the open, given the fact that I have tried to reach you via email since 8:30am Pacific Time, and as of yet, received nary a respone.
Again, my apology will immediately follow ANY confirmation that my conclusions are ill-founded.
Eric, again, patience, my friend.
GP is two things – a frequent traveler and a user of AOL mail.
The former precludes easily checking email, especially on all-day transcontinental trips or in winter when dealing with recalcitrant storms and their scrambling effects on travel.
The latter has a nasty habit of randomly eating emails from non-AOL sources.
Obviously I can’t speak directly for GP or GPW, but I myself assure you that your contributions here are welcomed and not prone to requiring censorship in the least. Yes, it is exasperating that the spam filter catches posts we would like to see and that our moderators’ aversion to censorship except in extreme cases exposes us to continuous lefty vitriol. However, a spam filter is an unfortunate fact of life in these days, and the fact that speech is free in this country also means that we have to put up with lefty poo-flinging.
interesting….
JonathanG, the most interesting thing about your rambling, wild-assed comments is that you’re allowed to post them here and demean the blog’s creators. And the comments remain for others to read.
On the flipside of the political spectrum –blogs in the GayLeftBorg– routinely chide conservative gay commenters, threaten them with explusion, and resort to the ineffective ChickenHawk taunt when the GayLeft spews no longer have relevancy.
You’re in the shallow end of the debate pool, JonathanG. Don’t get wet.
Thanks for that assessment, Matty. As usual, you attack the messenger (while accusing me of the same thing) without addressing the actual content. I assume that if Bruce and Dan tolerate your constant self-indulgent ad hominem attacks on us libtards, they are thick-skinned enough to take a few swipes themselves.
The list in question is pure propaganda — a litany of allegations that disregard the truth.
#48 – For the record: Bruce is a busy guy, and a sincere one, and I would be surprised if he had time to ban (or pre-review) individual comments, from any viewpoint.
I also lost several comments to the spam filter, at different times.
It takes time for the filter to get used to you. And Bruce can’t always respond instantly. Eric, I hope it works out for you.
In response to HollywoodNeoCon’s response in #48, I nominate him for Grande Conservative Blogress Diva 2007. 😉
Really, that was a lot of diva… Beyonce, is that you?? LOL
As usual, you attack the messenger (while accusing me of the same thing) without addressing the actual content.
That is because the hypocrisy of the content you put forth is so obvious.
For example, take this:
“Interrogating captured terrorists?” LOL! Is quizzing a man whom you are subjecting to dog bites or waterboarding “interrogation”? Not according to the Geneva Accords.
And where, exactly, in the Geneva Accords does what was done to Daniel Pearl or the listed examples here fall?
Since, JonathanG, you and your fellow Democrats called putting a stop to Saddam Hussein’s imprisonment, torture, and murder of others “unnecessary and unjustified”, it’s very amusing to watch you invoke the Geneva Accords — especially since the terrorists, like the ones who captured, tortured, and decapitated Daniel Pearl, certainly aren’t following it.
Leftists like you aren’t anti-torture; you’re anti-Bush. Saddam and Daniel Pearl’s captors demonstrate quite nicely that you’ll turn a blind eye to torture when it suits your political ends.
Ummm…what does Daniel Pearl have to do with any of this? He was executed is a horrific manner but (as far as I’ve heard) he wasn’t tortured by a supposedly “freedom-defending” nation. But nice job of equating the US with Saddam ND30, you really are a coward.
Hollywood Neocon:
I’d guess by the dearth of new posts the last few days that both Bruce and Dan are simply busy. Its not uncommon for them to reply to an e-mail a week later. And as we have been trying to tell you, the intermittent dropping of posts has happened to a lot of us. And since most others here consider me a raving liberal maniac, its not being selective based on your politics.
So tell your brother that we wish him the best and we thank him for his serivce.
You on the other hand, just go get a beer or something until Bruce gets back to you.
OK BannedFromTheRanch, I gotta call you out on this one. Granted, I haven’t read this whole thread, but there should be no “but” after a description of Daniel Pearl’s murder. He was murdered. It was disgusting. There are no qualifiers that make it anything less. Perhaps there are equally disgusting occurrences in this world that could stand on the same stage. But the way he was killed, there is nothing worse.
And NDT, I happen to think it was noble to stop Saddam’s brutality. However, as far as strategy goes in the War On Terror, it wasn’t the best road to take for the United States.
I apologize if I caused you some sort of distress, it was not my intention. I was comparing Mr. Pearl’s horrific execution to state-funded torture, there is certainly a place for a ‘but’ there. And there is nothing worse than being viciously decapitated by Islamofascist thugs? Obviously you’ve never been to one of my office Christmas parties!
I was comparing Mr. Pearl’s horrific execution to state-funded torture, there is certainly a place for a ‘but’ there.
And you can also compare it to much better examples of state-sponsored torture.
But stopping THAT from happening was “unnecessary and unjustified”, according to you and your fellow Democrats.
Don’t worry, though; you’re in good company. After all, the UN, Europe, and others had no trouble attacking the United States for supposedly-rampant torture, but completely ignored Saddam’s for years and threw hissy fits when Saddam was removed.
People get so upset when you take away their cash cow — especially one that pays them billions in bribes, will accept ridiculous markups on goods from their state-owned and family-owned companies because it has no choice, and who is supplying them with illegal, but cheap, oil.
I don’t think the two are comparable. Still, we don’t want to stoop to their level and that’s why there was great outrage at the Abu Ghraib scandal. Anything that might indicate a slide in principle should not be tolerated.
Yet, the great thing about America is, when our government does do something the people don’t agree with, they are held to account. Probably more than anything, this past election was about greater oversight of the White House by Congress. The voters were unhappy with the Republican leadership and decided a change was in order.
The moral of the story? Americans will always correct course whenever we veer too far offtrack.
Actually, what we are seeing now is not unlike what happened with Senator McCarthy.
A problem arises. Our elected officials then react to the problem. When they overreach, the public says “wait a second, we do not want this.”
It happened at the start of the Cold War and it’s happening now at the start of the War On Terror.
Still, we don’t want to stoop to their level and that’s why there was great outrage at the Abu Ghraib scandal. Anything that might indicate a slide in principle should not be tolerated.
Had these abuses not been investigated, prosecuted, and punished, THEN we would have a slide in principles.
However, the simple fact of the matter is that they were, while Saddam Hussein and his counterparts, who presided over far worse tortures on a far larger scale, would, had we not acted, still be doing the same thing.
That is why, Chase, your fellow Democrats don’t want to discuss, don’t want to acknowledge, and certainly don’t want anyone to know just how brutal Saddam was. As I mentioned before, their “torture” rhetoric would seem like the mean-spirited, partisan-driven drivel that it is if Americans had been shown how REAL torture looks.
Although I have no sympathy for the man, I’m sure once Padilla’s trial gets underway Americans will know full and well what REAL torture looks like.
HollywoodNeoCon-
Please email me directly as I have no earthly idea what your outbursts here are all about. Seriously.
Neither do the rest of us. Same could say about the other Gopers. 🙂 🙂
monty
#64 – Exactly right. Abu Ghraib was investigated, punished and originally revealed by none other than the U.S. military.
Which makes all the “outrage” over Abu Ghraib just so much baloney… the safe, after-the-fact, armchair hand-wringing of political and moral phonies.
The key good event around Abu Ghraib, that proves the morality and worth of the United States – namely, investigation of any abuses, and the start of the legal punishment process for those involved – had already happened, before any of our left-wing phony balonies began their screeching.
We have such great national leadership that all those ambitious College and Young Republicans are lining up at military recruiting centers nationwide to join a winning team.
Well, now that Jeane Kirkpatrick is dead, maybe the world just NEEDS someone in an appeasement role.
not that I agree at all with the notion that the Dems are doing this.
C’Mon Lets Just Get ‘ Em ok Two Things Straight That Are Very Clear…… (1) Republicans are Totally Against Everything Gay Oriented and (2) Boo! Love to Scare The American People Into Electing Them!!!! Yeah Yeah Yeah ..Preach to Me But I can See Behind The Facade!!!!!