JACK BAUER FOR PRESIDENT!
Posted on 04/05/2007 9:18:28 AM PDT by dotnetfellow
“Seems the world is already risen and at war with global terrorism to the tune of 1/2 trillion dollars a year in direct military expenditures.”
Bah, that’s nothing but posturing for show, to look like we’re accomplishing something. You can tell our “leaders” aren’t taking the threat seriously because muslims are still allowed into the country and our borders are not secure.
Also, our soldiers are not allowed to shoot back at the enemy without finding themselves before a court-martial. Until all of these things change, our showpiece “war on terror” is nothing but empty pageantry.
Uhhhhh,......whatever!.............
It seems to me that 100,000+ troops in Iraq is a definitions of “rise up against islamo-fascist terrorism”.
It seems to me that $1 billion a day spent on terrorism is “rise up against islamo-fascist terrorism”.
It seems to me that the UK, Australia, and 20 other countries in Iraq are “rise up against islamo-fascist terrorism.
It seems to me that every time I stand in an airport security line, I am “rise up against islamo-fascist terrorism”.
Now, I have given you my definition's of “rise up against islamo-fascist terrorism”, what else would you do?
Perhaps this is what America in 2007 is supposed to be...after all, God has a plan for all of us, and this must be part of it.
What did it take in 1937 to wake up Europe and the rest of the world?
Think of 2007 as 1937 and you start to gain a perspective.
It’s coming just as surely as it did then, and we are as we were then.
Perhaps. But islam and the terrorists don’t fight like the Germans or Japanese of the 1940s. They are shadows. They are EVERYWHERE in this country and they already have enormous power to control what is said about their threat.
They have all but taken over France and Spain. They are extremely well funded and have complete global coverage. They are not looking for a face to face fight. Why would they when we continue to reward their slow approach? If they step forward, announce their intensions (Shari law - world wide) the civilized world would get organized and resist. Instead, they use our freedoms as a tool against us and in time, we will lack the resolve to resist. They don’t have the power to take it, but we continue to give it them.
Of course if they get cocky and do something too aggressive, I don’t know, like stop broadcasting American Idol because they find it offensive to abdula, that would galvanize resistance. Within a month the sheepeople would demand the deaths of a few million wannabe terrorists and we’d be done with it for another 200 years.
That opinion carries no weight here. I have several relatives in the ME and in the carrier groups in uniform. They seem pretty sure they are doing something useful.
If we don’t have the will to keep out poor, backward, unarmed peasants from Central America, we ain’t gonna have the will to keep out Islamo-terrorists.
“For example, a nation that will send mothers of young children into ground infantry combat operations, when the survival of the nation is not under such dire threat as to objectively require such sacrifices, DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE DEFENDED.”
WOW!? Equal rights. Volunteer military.
It will take a lot, and not just to overcome the soft-headed liberals. Conservatives in the west, and people like Russia’s Putin, who isn’t a conservative, but certainly isn’t a soft-headed liberal, either, reacted to 9/11, Madrid, and London with no visible seriousness either.
Bush let the Saudis and the rest of the Gulf powers entirely off the hook for 9/11 and continues to give them unlimited compass with zero accountability. And that’s to say nothing of the Islamist power elements in Pakistan.
As for what we did — unserious, at best. Saddam was a threat, and certainly a fascist, but an Islamofascist? Given that he’d rarely met an Islamist he wouldn’t gladly roast on a stake, not really. And would we have devoted an occupation force a tiny fraction of the post-WWII occupation force in Germany had we really wanted to make a difference?
What we did domestically — simply a farce. The sewn-on-badge unarmed can’t-pass-a-small-town-police-exam stalwarts of the Transportation Security Agency as our line of defense?
In Spain, the conservative then-government took pains to blame the Basques for the Madrid bombings. They lost to the Socialists in large because of that maneuver, and because (unfortunately) the attacks seemed to prove correct the Socialists argument that going into Iraq would cause blowback terrorism at home.
Every conservative element of British society was quick to demand a muted response to the London bombings, too. There wasn’t a single Tory who got up on his feet in the House of Commons to demand real crackdowns on Saudi-funded madrassas or the other elements toxifying the British-born Muslim communities.
The delivery system could be set up on a ship? The container on board an offshore ship opens up and viola!
Perhaps if AQ blew up the Louvre or some other secular shrine.
You touch on another point that occasionally I think about.
Clearly, the American public has lost their guts to fight any war that is any tougher than a year or two job. I seriously doubt we could even reinstate the draft anymore without a massive movement for people just to refuse to show up.
IMO what this means is we need to find another way to fight these wars, either diplomatically or economically. I think the American people have clearly shown they don't have the stones to fight a long and protracted war.
I figure there is 30% of the population that is always against any war and about 35% that support military action. The rest in the middle waffle, are extremely uncommitted and bail at the first sign of the going getting tough.
Sad truth, but until our leaders face that fact and figure out a better way to defend our Nation's interests, all might be lost.
“unserious, at best. Saddam was a threat, and certainly a fascist, but an Islamofascist?”
Saddam, pragmatically interested in doing harm against the US, allied himself with islamo-fasicst terrorists.
Iraq, strategically located, is the central battle on the war on islamo-fascist terrorism.
“Seems the world is already risen”
Then why the guff from Iran? Syria? Lebanon?
When the free world is willing to use overwhelming force to stop the islamo-fascism in its tracks, only then can we honestly say that the free world has risen against it.
JACK BAUER FOR PRESIDENT!
Only two things.
1) Loss of cable/satellite TV
2) Loss of home-delivered Pizza
Bread and circuses.
Some seem to want total global thermonuclear war. It might be entertaining, but most get plenty of entertainment in less bloodthirsty ways.
“I see, you won’t really answer, so I’ll make a tab at it.”
Your original question was not directed at me, so I didn’t owe you an answer. Your list aside, the “world” has not risen up. It has appeased and cajoled and made the problem worse by doing so.
In the 1950’s you had the agriculture department overrun with communists.
In the 1960’s the overran, to this day, the state department with communists and socialists.
In the lat 60’s and 1970’s the MSM learned to create a leftward push with their unchallenged bias.
The left saw the 80’s as a reagan blip.
They viewed the 1990’s as athe euniquing or oprafacation of the “manliness” of society into a more pliable controllable society. (see clinton’s ponytail child/man)
9/11 screwed them up because the horror was so visible and well displayed. This is why CNN forbits 9/11 video any more.
It has to be a horrible event which pretty much kills off leftists and leaves the true “heirs of the 300” to take out the bad guys. (remember the 300 were all fathers of sons)
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.