Skip to comments.
When People Refuse to be Terrorized
Asharq Alawsat ^
| July 27, 2007
| Amir Taheri
Posted on 08/24/2007 5:10:12 PM PDT by nuconvert
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
1
posted on
08/24/2007 5:10:14 PM PDT
by
nuconvert
To: Valin; AdmSmith
2
posted on
08/24/2007 5:11:28 PM PDT
by
nuconvert
("Terrorism is not the enemy. It is a means to the ends of militant Islamism." MZJ)
To: nuconvert
da terra bizness just ain’t wuddit used to be.
To: nuconvert
Despite massive efforts by radical anti-war militants, the new Democrat leadership in the US has refused to help Al Qaeda realize its goals in Iraq. The new emerging consensus in the US is that the American-led coalition ought to remain in Iraq at least until the next Iraqi general election in 2009. The idea is also backed by the Iraqi government and parliament. Terror fails when people refuse to be terrorized. And this may be happening in Iraq. In spite of the liberals trying to defeat George Bush's war against terrorism, their efforts may be their Waterloo. We can only hope.
4
posted on
08/24/2007 5:15:49 PM PDT
by
Stars&StripesNE
(Liberals are the enemy within)
To: Kaslin; Tut
5
posted on
08/24/2007 5:17:24 PM PDT
by
Stars&StripesNE
(Liberals are the enemy within)
To: Jen's Mom
Hissyfithillary is probably having a hissyfit over this good news.
6
posted on
08/24/2007 5:21:49 PM PDT
by
BARLF
To: nuconvert
Yep. If Al Qaeda cannot win in Iraq, it can't win anywhere. This is bound to demoralize jihadists and suppress their fund-raising and recruitment. No one wants to die for a lost cause.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
7
posted on
08/24/2007 5:29:08 PM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: nuconvert
In World War II, we learned how to break the will of those fighting us. We fire bombed them and saved over 500,000 of our own troops.
8
posted on
08/24/2007 5:29:12 PM PDT
by
RC2
To: nuconvert
Despite massive efforts by radical anti-war militants, the new Democrat leadership in the US has refused to help Al Qaeda realize its goals in Iraq.Well, there's some spin. The new democrat leadership tried it's best to force a premature withdrawal, which would have resulted in an al Qaeda victory. They don't get credit for failing to achieve the goal they sought.
To: RC2
I don’t know about the accuracy of your number.
I don’t condone firebombing civilians.
10
posted on
08/24/2007 5:31:55 PM PDT
by
nuconvert
("Terrorism is not the enemy. It is a means to the ends of militant Islamism." MZJ)
To: nuconvert
11
posted on
08/24/2007 5:33:18 PM PDT
by
Danae
(Anail nathrach, orth' bhais's bethad, do chel denmha (Smoke clears and Fred Thompson is President))
To: ModelBreaker
That is a strange sentence.
12
posted on
08/24/2007 5:33:46 PM PDT
by
nuconvert
("Terrorism is not the enemy. It is a means to the ends of militant Islamism." MZJ)
To: Jen's Mom
13
posted on
08/24/2007 5:33:48 PM PDT
by
Kaslin
(The Surge is working and the li(e)berals know it)
To: BARLF
Who here thinks at this same time next year the dems will have heartily aligned themselves with the winning side, claiming to have been for victory all along?
Now taking bets.
14
posted on
08/24/2007 5:39:41 PM PDT
by
sinanju
To: nuconvert
That is a strange sentence.Which one?
To: ModelBreaker
The one you quoted in your #9 post....”Despite massive efforts by radical anti-war militants, the new Democrat leadership in the US has refused to help Al Qaeda realize its goals in Iraq.”
I’d like to ask Taheri what he meant by that.
16
posted on
08/24/2007 5:42:42 PM PDT
by
nuconvert
("Terrorism is not the enemy. It is a means to the ends of militant Islamism." MZJ)
To: nuconvert; Ernest_at_the_Beach
Despite massive efforts by radical anti-war militants, the new Democrat leadership in the US has refused to help Al Qaeda realize its goals in Iraq... so the liberals who do help Al Qaeda realize its goals in Iraq are nothing but anti-war militants now?
I'm so confused...
17
posted on
08/24/2007 5:59:11 PM PDT
by
Fred Nerks
(Fair dinkum!)
To: nuconvert
18
posted on
08/24/2007 6:00:29 PM PDT
by
359Henrie
(We need Gen. Curtis Le May, Liberals give us Gen. Wesley Clark.)
To: nuconvert
AQ has lost in Iraq, they just won't admit it. But, when they do, they'll need a big PR target in the US to lift their spirits and recruitment.
Mass transit or car ferrys will be next.
19
posted on
08/24/2007 6:10:52 PM PDT
by
leadhead
(Democracy can withstand anything but democrats)
To: nuconvert
“I don’t condone firebombing civilians.”
Fortunately, you were not making the command decision in WW II or we might be speaking German.
Consider that Hamburg and Dresden were fire bombed until a fire storm casused the cobblestones to melt.
A friend was a bombardier and said there were flaming tree trunks lifted thousands of feet in the air by the updraft from the flames.
Tokyo was not much better.
War IS H*ll.
Defeat is worse.
Got burka?
20
posted on
08/24/2007 6:11:59 PM PDT
by
GladesGuru
(In a society predicated upon freedom, it is essential to examine principle)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson