Dems Determined To Ignore Progress In Iraq (Mark Steyn On The Defeaticrats Quagmire Alert)

Chicago Sun-Times ^ | 12/04.05 | Mark Steyn

[billhilly]

Great Idea. I'm following suit.

[backhoe]

[Diana in Wisconsin]

That man is a pleasure to read! Defeaticrats! I love it! :)

[lawgirl]

Toppling Saddam was worth doing in and of itself.

Exactly. Everyone deserves to live free of fear of their own government- whether they are russian or north korean or chinese or rwandan. Everyone deserves freedom and the difference between us and them is that we believe that freedom is what people really truly long for. And I think it is a worthy cause to help people achieve a life where they are limited only by their own dreams and ambition, without fear of speaking their mind.

[Brian Allen]

Thank you for pinging me, Pokey.

[mylife]

And here's where the scale of the Bush gamble becomes clear. Islam and "the West" have a long history. And, without rehashing the last millennium and a half, the Muslim conquest of Europe and then the Crusades and the fall of Andalusia, if you take out a map of the world and look at the rise of the European empires you notice a curious thing: in conquering the world the imperial powers for the most part simply bypassed the Islamic world. They made Africa and South Asia and Latin America and everywhere else seats of European power, but they left the Middle East alone. And, even when they eventually got their hands on the region, after the First World War, they made no serious attempt to reform the neighborhood. We live with the consequences of that today.

Thank God GWB is unwilling to accept the status quo. Quite honestly the europeans made a complete mess of the middle east after WWI and GWB was unwilling to continue along with the consequences of thier actions/inactions

[aculeus]

Thanks for the ping.

[manwiththehands]

Thanks for the tip. I'll look him up. I'm so frustrated with our Senate any good news about anyone there would be helpful for me. He has to be better than our DuhWhine and "Boo Hoo" Voinovich.

[daviddennis]

Lieberman's honest and stands up for what he believes.

I'd say he voted against Clinton's impeachment because he believes in the Democratic party as a whole. I don't think that's so bad.

That being said, he can't get past the MoveOners to become President, which is too bad since he's the only Democrat I know of who wouldn't be an unmitigated disaster.

D

[whd23]

That being said, he can't get past the MoveOners to become President, which is too bad since he's the only Democrat I know of who wouldn't be an unmitigated disaster.

Before you all get too excited over Lieberman, remember that he played an active role in attempting to steal the 2000 election. Read "At Any Cost : How Al Gore Tried to Steal the Election"

He may be one of the most sane people in the Democrat party, but he's still a sleaze.

[Irish_Thatcherite]

And here's where the scale of the Bush gamble becomes clear. Islam and "the West" have a long history. And, without rehashing the last millennium and a half, the Muslim conquest of Europe and then the Crusades and the fall of Andalusia, if you take out a map of the world and look at the rise of the European empires you notice a curious thing: in conquering the world the imperial powers for the most part simply bypassed the Islamic world. They made Africa and South Asia and Latin America and everywhere else seats of European power, but they left the Middle East alone. And, even when they eventually got their hands on the region, after the First World War, they made no serious attempt to reform the neighborhood. We live with the consequences of that today.

That is true.

[hattend]

BTTT

[Homer_J_Simpson]

The Defeaticrats were against the benchmarks before they were for them.

Democrats: The American surrender donkeys.

[octavianaugustus]

This Steyn paragraph is one of the most brilliant summaries of world history I have ever read! However, the Europeans did not "simply bypass the Islamic world". It took the Portuguese King, Henry The Navigator, most of the 1400's to creep down the coast of Africa and to find a sea route to India and China. They took the long way around precisely because the Crusades could not crack the Islamic nut, so to speak!

[mylife]

This Steyn paragraph is one of the most brilliant summaries of world history I have ever read!

That is on of the things I love about Steyn, He has an analytical mind and the ability to cut thru the crap.
I also love his sense of humor and the way he forces us to engage our minds.

He it undoubtedly a man without parallel.
"The one man global content provider!"

[300winmag]

Not the media and certainly not Lieberman's colleagues in the Defeaticrat Party.

I had to read that five times before it dawned on me the word was not "defecate". Although either way makes a lot of sense.

[FairOpinion]

An excellent article.

I think we should start using "defeaticrats" as a key word for articles dealing with their demands to cut and run.

[PzLdr]

Actually, I think the Portuguese [it's Prince Henry - he never made it to King]went around Africa because the breakdown [and civil wars] of the Mongol Empire made the trade routes unsafe. Trade had been going through the Muslims' areas for hundreds of years before, during and after the Crusading era.

[Victoria Delsoul]

Meanwhile, Iraq's experiment in Arab liberty has had ripple effects beyond its borders, pushing the Syrians most of the way out of Lebanon, and in Syria itself significantly weakening Baby Assad's regime. Saad Eddin Ibrahim, who's spent years as a beleaguered democracy advocate in Egypt, told the Washington Post's Jim Hoagland the other day that, although he'd opposed the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, he had to admit it had "unfrozen the Middle East, just as Napoleon's 1798 expedition did. Elections in Iraq force the theocrats and autocrats to put democracy on the agenda, even if only to fight against us. Look, neither Napoleon nor President Bush could impregnate the region with political change. But they were able to be the midwives."

Excellent point. Don't expect the media to report about the advances in the Iraq war, but only what they perceive as failure and doom and gloom of GW's war on terror. We know, however, that the reasons for this blatant omission is the media's political alliance with the Democrats and the Left. Their objective is to undermine the Bush presidency in the hopes that the Democrats will score better points next election when it comes to seats in Congress and the presidency itself.

[Army Air Corps]

Precisely. 'Tis sick that some are willing to sell-out an entire budding democracy for the possibility of a few extra votes at the polls. Selfishness defined.