Posted on 11/25/2006 10:13:46 AM PST by Lunatic Fringe
Oh my goodness we have got to start negotiating with them now or they will kill us all....Run away, run away. Or, you could apply the idea that you only get true lasting peace when all of your enemies are dead and get on with making true lasting peace.
They are waiting to pick them up at the after Christmas sales
Shame on me, I snickered.
This is one more reason we should stay in Iraq. If the enemy has grown this sophisticated then there is an even greater argument to continue fighting them because they have grown more dangerous. This war is like fighting cockroaches in a tenement house. At times you can kill most of the roaches but you have to keep at it constantly. Unfortunately, Americans are used to instant gratification.
Yep, I agree. If they have grown stronger then we must realize that they will come for our nation swiftly if we pull out of Iraq.
It is like roaches, but maybe a demolition of the infested areas is the only way, instead of stomping them one at a time.
Why Sadr still breaths I do not understand.
I believe that General Abizaid is right, that stablity can be achieved. But I cant see that until some major players are eliminated. Maybe they all know something we dont.
Yes,...and the cockroaches do not plan on staying over there,,,,,
There is a battle over here also.....
***************************************
There is a book (now available in paperback ):
***********************
Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left
(Hardcover)
by David Horowitz
********************************************************
And reviews:
****************************************
Editorial Reviews
Rich Lowry, Editor National Review
David Horowitz is synonymous with pyrotechnics. A historian and polemicist of the first order, he is paid the ultimate compliment --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.
Davis Hanson, Author, Ripples of Battle
An original look at those who want us to fail in the Middle East, both at home and abroad. The --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.
***********************************************************
See all Editorial Reviews
Fascinating Analysis of Leftist Goals, August 13, 2006
Reviewer: N. Sincerity - See all my reviews
A former 1960s radical, Horowitz is well-acquainted with the Leftist mindset. In this book, he strives to explain the modern alliance between left wing progressivists and radical Islamofascists. He argues that this alliance is based on a common desire to destroy Western capitalism. Leftist sympathy with Islamofascist ideas makes no sense from an intellectual point of view, given that countries ruled by radical Islamists are among the most racist, sexist, theocratic states in the world today. However, Leftists have recognized that they can benefit politically from destructive terrorist attacks on the Western world. A West under attack can be made to turn on its leaders in fear and desperation (as they did in Spain after the Madrid train bombings). Only once people reject current government structures can the Left execute its anti-capitalist revolution and build a new reality that mirrors the Leftist view of utopia. The complete and utter idealogical hypocrisy of the Islamofascist-Leftist alliance is distressing, but as Horowitz reminds us, Leftists radicals truly believe the ends justify the means.
***************************************
Or, in this case, a tenement house where the cockroaches are killing each other.
It is not a viable strategic option to turn over the lands that contain 70% of the World's know oil reserves to either Sunni or Shiite religious fanatics.
Maybe the Realpolitik solution is to hunker down and allow the Shiite and Sunni religious fanatics to slaughter each other to their heart's content until the only Iraqis left alive in Iraq are the less religious Iraqis.
Whatever your current financial situation, it's difficult to be self-sustaining when you're dead.
Why Liberals Refuse to Admit the Reality of Islamic Fascism
Posted by nathanbedford to Amos the Prophet; Reagan Man; JasonC
On News/Activism 08/16/2006 2:00:05 AM EDT • 43 of 110
A couple of days ago I published the following comments in response to a Mark Steyn column in which I tried to grapple with the why of it, why do liberals willfully turned their faces from the reality of the Islamic fascist threat and court a new dark age if we succumb?
The rabbi and I both agree on the symptoms of the disease. I put the label "cultural Marxism" on the collection of symptoms which are crippling us in our efforts to fight this expert global, generational, war for existence. I also distinguish between the liberal elitists and their useful idiots, the latter class consisting of unwitting dupes who exhibit the same symptoms but for reasons that are passive rather than aggressive. The elites I see as driven by reckless ambition.
Here's my take:
All of this is a direct result of the lethal legacy of THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL which gave birth to cultural Marxism which renders the elites of the left incapable of dealing with Muslim terrorists as Muslims. This disease has infected Europe where it has spread on the continent and, as Melanie Phillips pointed out in her book, LONDONISTAN, even Great Britain suffers from a severe infection. In America, the virus is most obvious in the blue states. Nevertheless, we were only a few electoral votes in Florida and 60,000 popular votes in Ohio away from slipping down into the swamps of multiculturalism (Cultural Marxism). If that should happen, we will be hopelessly vulnerable to Muslim terrorism and perhaps even ultimate rule as a Muslim caliphate.
I am of the opinion that when Marc Steyn wrote the following it could have as aptly applied to The Cultural Marxism of the left:
"Absent a determination to throttle the ideology, we're about to witness the unraveling of the world."
We are in world war against 1.2 billion Muslims or some fanatical fraction thereof. They are maniacal, suicidal, and homicidal. They are not amenable to diplomacy, blandishment, reason, bribery or Western Enlightenment. It is a very formidable enemy.
To have any hope of winning a global, asymmetrical, and generational war with these people we must have our own house in order. We do not because we are undermined by the lethal legacy of THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL: Cultural Marxism.
Pan nationalism (which really means the absence of nationalism), anti-Americanism, feminism (anti-paternalism), atheism (anticlericalism), extreme environmentalism (especially extreme global warming), anti-racism (group victimology), homosexual activism (anti-family hatred), etc. are all excressences of Cultural Marxism. This doctrine was explicitly fashioned to break down the resistance of Western civilization to communism.
It was designed to pave the way for the acceptance of the Russian Revolution in Germany in the 1920s. In doing so it carved out areas against the Western culture which it saw as bulwarks against communism: the family, the Church, the school. Thus it was perfectly positioned at the time of the ostensible and apparent failure of communism at the time of the fall of the Berlin Wall to convert the left fully from an economic Marxism to a Cultural Marxism. That is what we have today.
I am coming to the conclusion that the elites in the left are not purblind, not the misguided victims of their own worldview, but cynical high-stakes gamblers who risk plunging themselves and us into a new dark age if it will enhance their own chances to rule. Unless one believes that the top elitists on the left genuinely do not see the threat to Western civilization posed by a Muslim theocracy, there is no other plausible explanation. After all, Muslim fundamentalists stand for everything repugnant to the left-at least on a superficial level: the belief in God; rule by theocracy; the virtual enslavement of women; repudiation of the scientific method; superstition, etc. life in such a society should be utterly insupportable to leftists. Yet they undermine the war against terrorism at every turn, they oppose the Patriot Act, they oppose international telephone surveillance, they oppose vigorous interrogation, they oppose incarceration, to list just a few. Why?
How did Lenin behave as he was taking over power in Russia? He negotiated a sellout deal for peace through appeasement with imperial Germany. Mao behaved even more scurrilously. Because of biased reporting of it is commonly believed in America that it was the Communists in China, rather than the Nationalists who were believed to be corrupt and passive, who were aggressive in fighting the Japanese in World War II. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact Mao betrayed his nationalist allies quite often to the Japanese and otherwise exploited the war to defeat the Nationalists while virtually undertaking no action against the Japanese.
At the time Mao was fully aware of the rape of Nanking and brutality which the Japanese had visited upon his people. He deliberately courted the defeat of China and subjected his fellow Chinese to further brutality in order to advance the interests of communism and especially his own personal lust for power. This was the pattern of Mao's life, Lenin's life, and Stalin's life.
I believe that the elitists on the left, not the useful idiots, are playing the same game.
You're the only one who's been using slogans, kid.
Here's something he just helped me learn, though -- just how little of Iraq is ready for transition to Iraqi control.
They're financing the war through kidnapping, drug dealing counterfeiting, etc.
They're now doing enough of it that the whole operation pays for itself.
The Times is too modest...
"self sustaining" does not mean "banks a profit". It means they are able to gather the revenues they need to nihilistically blow each other up indefinitely. There's no "profit" in that, it's all waste. In a sense, the so-called "insurgency" (that is not what it is, by the way) is killing more military-age Iraqi men faster than we would have had we waged the war as a WW2-style campaign.
But yes, let's complain and wring our hands about it, how much the enemy is achieving in blowing themselves up. They're blowing themselves up so effectively that we must be losing, right?
It's not "closer to peace" since we won the war, no. The violence has indeed gotten worse. The reason for that is that a critical mass of Iraqis have chosen tribal warfare, with some groups jockeying for power, some trying to undermine the elected government, some merely looking for revenge, etc. That's the way things are and that's the way I'm afraid they'll be for a while.
Ok? Now, what's your point?
If they were running a deficit would we all be better off?
Has Los Angeles been pacified, has Cincinnati or Chicago?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.