Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Looking for the exit" (from a quagmire)
UPI ^ | April 30, 04 | Arnaud de Borchgrave

Posted on 04/30/2004 2:09:46 PM PDT by churchillbuff

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last
To: ambrose
Sure... because things were quiet earlier. I am tired of all the Monday Morning Quarterbacking.

Unless you have an argument against his argument, that is simply another snide comment. That, by the way, is certainly not the reason he did not go public earlier.

The fact is that our policy--the President's announced policy in the State of The Union--serves to confirm the worst charge that our real enemies have made against us, that we have been trying to impose our cultural values on the Arab peoples. It is sheer folly to think that giving the real terrorists the confirmation they seek, to help them recruit, helps America--and the only interest we have a right to be seeking is the American interest.

I could go further and comment on the absurdity of our taxing the American people to rebuild an oil rich land, but that opens up a whole other discussion.

21 posted on 04/30/2004 3:04:36 PM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
Lectures on "hate" from somebody who compared Gen. Odom to a cannibal? Give me a break. (Clearly, hate has already "consumed" your critical abilities!)
22 posted on 04/30/2004 3:06:00 PM PDT by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
There is nothing to respond to. Odom's statements contain little more than dire predictions for the future and other such lamentations.

He chose to make these predictions when things haven't been going well.

This reminds me of how Dick Morris predicts Bush is going to lose when a poll comes out showing that Bush is behind. The next week, Dick Morris writes a column stating that Bush is going to win - write after a new poll comes out showing Bush is ahead.

In each instance, Morris is making a prediction for the future on transitory events which are subject to change.

Odom is doing little different here.
23 posted on 04/30/2004 3:23:01 PM PDT by ambrose (AP Headline: "Kerry Says His 'Family' Owns SUV, Not He")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
There is nothing to respond to. Odom's statements contain little more than dire predictions for the future and other such lamentations.

Well, it may be more obvious to me that Odom is right in his predictions, because, being in agreement, I understand the rationale behind them. My version of that rationale is set forth in my essay, Iraq--Tactical Folly, Strategic Madness..

However, quite apart from the immediate, the folly of trying to impose Democracy on multi-cultural Third World peoples, has been demonstrated over and over again, over the past 45 years. There are links to materials offered to substantiate that at the site of the Iraq essay, above.

William Flax

24 posted on 04/30/2004 3:29:57 PM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
Hello Folks and Happy Friday!

At least to those of us enjoying FREEDOM over HERE--while those who ( hopefully a very large majority of service-people and Reservists) VOLUNTEERED to protect America spend their Friday in a dust bowl of a place.

My question has always been simple:
Afghanistan and IRAQ had to be "Dealt" with in some manner--

If not NOW: under the closest we can get to a Conservative/willing president to TAKE action and NOT run form it.

And if NOT with OUR ARMIES--with What?? harsh Words??

And my question: general or no General giving "IMPUT"--

- I guess we are IN THERE now...right..well..LIKE SOMEONE SAID--NO MONDAY MORNING QUARTERBACKING..RIGHT??

I guess sooner or later we have to leave...right??

Do we leave IMMEDIATELY like Kerry TALKS about--but knows we can't--OR

Do we leave under OUR terms that hopefully will be BEST for OUR SECURITY NEEDS= OUR security needs; which is why I think why in the LONG long run and short run we are there.

BUT either way--- WILL IT MATTER HOW WE LEAVE??????????

We will still be friends and support the only other close-to-Democracy country there: Isreal--Right??

We could LEAVE NOW!! GIVE BACK all the found saddam money!!

HELL!! even RETURN SADDAM and have Al Qaeda dancing in the streets...right??

We will STILL be the target of THEIR expansion of THEIR GOALS of a world run by RADICAL IMANS---and their plans of pushing Isreal into the sea--and any other 'Friends of my enemies' as they call us too??

So--isn't it--AT THIS POINT IN HISTORY NOW---UP TO US TO DO THE BEST AND STAY --INFLICT AS MUCH DAMAGE ON THEM--OVER
T H E R E RATHER THAN HAVE THAT MANY MORE TERRORIST S T I L L ALIVE IF WE DID NOTHING??

SEEMS LIKE THERE ARE AN AWEFUL LOT OF THEM--BUT, ALL SURROUNDED IN FALLUJA--ISN'T THAT A GOOD PLACE FOR THEM TO BE??

Like I have told many here--I am in High School--but I READ ALOT!!!--and maybe some of my views are very simple--
but---isn't that how it should be??

I believe in backing who will make us MORE SECURE using ANY MEANS our country has,
I believe that--in a time of war like NOW---we should ALL support our Troops and president--and if you have misgivings--GO TO THE PRESIDENT!! NOT to the Press or ex-allies.

And I would really LIKE to see NO poltitics UNTIL the war is finished--seeing how even to me--a student--I am DISGUSTED by these Screaming and yelling SENATORS AND CONGRESSMEN that you would think care MORE abot what they say--than how many 'Points" they think their Liberal Party can make in the LIBERAL MEDIA.

Am I wrong about "Them there terrorist" hating us anyhow?
Am I wrong that, like Hitler and Nazi germany--if they were stopped NOW more Iraqis/others and sooner or later more AMERICANS will be killed?

And am I wrong that general or Hollystar--you have something to say--if there is ANY CHANCE at ONE IN A BILLION it could aid the enemy in any way--or hurt our country or troops in anyway--those comments should NOT BE SAID in PUBLIC even if right??

This Hillary Clinton too?!?! Her Screaming and Ted Kennedy Screaming??!?

Did THEY scream like THAT CONDEMING the Terrorists??

Well--just my two bits--sorry for going on for so long--

I got class mates who think that Gorelick was "...a finalist on 'The Apprentice'.. so you know why I steam and rant and rave here myself!!! Airborn:the younger one!
25 posted on 04/30/2004 3:29:58 PM PDT by AirBorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
The only people who are looking for an "exit" are the democrats. They hate war .. and they want to be rid of this issue. They know it's the President's strong suit. As long as the war is in the forefront, the dems will be looking for a way out. THAT's WHY WE CANNOT TRUST THE DEMOCRATS WITH NATIONAL SECURITY - THEY ARE ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR THE EASY WAY OUT!!
26 posted on 04/30/2004 4:15:25 PM PDT by CyberAnt (The 2004 Election is for the SOUL of AMERICA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
you view a general officer of the United States Army as somebody who lives like a lizard under a rock? wow, you certainly have a low opinion of the men who wear the American uniform.

Let's not get carried away. Benedict Arnold, Timothy McVeigh and John Fonda Kerry also wore the uniform.

Wearing the clothes, of itself, isn't enough to get my respect.

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
http://12thman.us/media/jihad.rm (Requires RealPlayer)

Who is Steve Emerson?

27 posted on 04/30/2004 4:56:29 PM PDT by JCG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JCG
Wearing the clothes, of itself, isn't enough to get my respect.

You sound like a Leftist. Maybe you are

28 posted on 04/30/2004 4:58:41 PM PDT by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
But I would add this from the standpoint of my own criticism. I posted a statement of how I believed the War on Terror should be handled in the fall of 2001: War 2001--The Shortest, Surest Path To Victory..

Excerpt...

Such an image of America's purpose--and one need only look back to the Washington/Jefferson foreign policy, to which we adhered from the inception of the Republic until the early Twentieth Century, to demonstrate that such was indeed our traditional purpose in most foreign engagements--will make it infinitely harder for the future bin Ladens to recruit. It will also make it increasingly more difficult for any whom they do recruit to find any established social circle on earth, in which they will be welcome.

Yo, Neville. This is complete balderdash. There's no going back to a foreign policy of 200 plus years ago. Islam (the Jihadis' "established social circle on earth") is on the march -- again -- and can only be stopped by total defeat. Nothing, I repeat, nothing is going to stop future bin Ladens from recruiting suicidal psychopaths except for their total destruction.

Singapore for you ... Midway for me.

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
http://12thman.us/media/jihad.rm (Requires RealPlayer)

Who is Steve Emerson?

29 posted on 04/30/2004 5:10:51 PM PDT by JCG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
You are correct, Sir.
30 posted on 04/30/2004 5:34:47 PM PDT by Destro (Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting www.johnathangaltfilms.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
You sound like a Leftist. Maybe you are

There's nothing like that old ad hominem thing when you can't make a case.

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
http://12thman.us/media/jihad.rm (Requires RealPlayer)

Who is Steve Emerson?

31 posted on 05/01/2004 5:18:09 AM PDT by JCG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: JCG
Yo, Neville. This is complete balderdash. There's no going back to a foreign policy of 200 plus years ago.

Our traditional foreign policy was for the ages. Our present foreign policy is moronic. It is not workable now, it would not have been workable 200 years ago. It will not be workable 1000 years from now.

Our traditional foreign policy went after our actual enemies. It did not insult people by claiming we knew better than they, what sort of culture they should develop. The post victory tangent in Iraq is not a foreign policy, it is an ego trip for socialist theorists--the crack-brains who believe in an undifferentiated humanity, responding like putty to environmental manipulation. The domestic aspect of the same malady is behind almost every major social problem that America has.

For analysis of the underlying ideological malady see The Lies Of Socialism. For analysis of the 40+ year old, failed Leftwing Democrat, foreign policy that the Administration is trying to revive, see Democracy In The Third World.

As for your stupid Neville quip, why don't you look a bit deeper into your own reference. What Chamberlain was agreeing to in 1938 was more akin to what the Administration wants to force on Iraqi minority peoples than what I have suggested is the correct approach to the Near East.

William Flax

32 posted on 05/01/2004 11:05:06 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: JCG
By the way, where in my essay on the war did you find any suggestion that I do not support the idea of totally destroying the actual terrorists? The whole point is that they have made themselves international outlaws, and must be destroyed. But that, again, has nothing to do with the silly pipe dreams of changing other nations' cultures.

When a Republican Administration embraces the ideas of Bill Clinton and Dean Rusk, they do not speak for me. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson did and do.

And by the way, while you provide links to sources that recognize an internal threat, you do not tell us what you would do to close our borders. That failure is just as serious a mistake as the Iraqi tangent, which you apparently support.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

33 posted on 05/01/2004 11:39:53 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
Our traditional foreign policy went after our actual enemies.

Are we not doing that?

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
http://12thman.us/media/jihad.rm (Requires RealPlayer)

Who is Steve Emerson?

34 posted on 05/01/2004 1:48:44 PM PDT by JCG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
But that, again, has nothing to do with the silly pipe dreams of changing other nations' cultures.

They want to change our culture -- or kill us. Why shouldn't we want to change theirs? Considering that we did just that in Germany and Japan, changing the culture -- sufficiently -- is hardly a pipe dream.

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
http://12thman.us/media/jihad.rm (Requires RealPlayer)

Who is Steve Emerson?

35 posted on 05/01/2004 1:54:24 PM PDT by JCG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: JCG
I dealt briefly with the questions of what we did--or did not--accomplish in post-war Germany and Japan; and the very salient differences from Iraq in the essay on Iraq.

As for "pipe-dreams," certainly the idea that the Arab world can alter American culture from afar is an extreme example. You need to distinguish between the relatively small numbers of fanatics who follow Bin Laden and those who may merely cheer, if they feel he is humiliating us. But the idea that a force with no industry, no planes of its own, no tanks, ships, etc., can seriously threaten the future existence of the American nation is ridiculous.

Let us put threats into perspective. Bin Laden killed perhaps 4,000 out of 200,000,000 Americans of the traditional European-origined American mainstream. That is one out of 50,000 people. During the period since the Administration took office, it is conservatively estimated that perhaps 4,000,000, Third World peoples have entered the United States--many illegally. That is a ratio of one to 50, and is part of a trend that has now been going on for almost 40 years, markedly changing the character of our populations in many areas.

If you are concerned about preserving American culture, join many of us in demanding that we close the borders. That is far more practical than many of the things that we are presently doing overseas.

William Flax

36 posted on 05/03/2004 12:00:11 PM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
You need to distinguish between the relatively small numbers of fanatics who follow Bin Laden and those who may merely cheer, if they feel he is humiliating us.

No, you need to distinguish between the number of fanatics who follow Bin Laden and the number of fanatics in Islam at large. Would 120 million be too large a number for you to digest?

But the idea that a force with no industry, no planes of its own, no tanks, ships, etc., can seriously threaten the future existence of the American nation is ridiculous.

Au contraire. The advent of WMD -- a threat which will only grow unless we do something to stop it -- could most certainly spell doom for our way of life. A few dirty bombs here, a little smallpox there and pretty soon...well you get the picture. Or maybe you don't.

Isolationism was great, when we could afford it. Those days are long gone.

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
http://12thman.us/media/jihad.rm (Requires RealPlayer)

Who is Steve Emerson?

37 posted on 05/03/2004 5:17:42 PM PDT by JCG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson