Posted on 11/10/2006 6:57:10 AM PST by Col. Bob
Nancy Pelosi was interviewed on Fox Report tonight and asked what her plan for victory in Iraq would look like. After a few seconds of stammering, the obvious awkward moment ended. Here's Nancy Pelosi on defining victory in Iraq:
“The point is this isn’t a war to win, it’s a situation to solve. And you define ‘winning’ any way you want, but you must solve this problem.”
"This isn't a war to win"? This is the next SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES? We're doomed.
See the video on Amy's URL:
Discover the Network put it this way:
"Bipartisanship" has been a keyword in many of Pelosi's speeches. In an address she delivered in 2002, for instance, she remarked, "We must stand together in a bipartisan way to fight the war against terrorism." Though she supported the Clinton Administration's military actions in Haiti, Kosovo, and Bosnia, she has denounced both the 1991 and 2003 wars in Iraq. Pelosi has also opposed President George W. Bush on most issues of Homeland Security, and has most recently joined the ACLU's crusade to limit the powers of the Patriot Act.
Hypocrisy anyone?
(Excerpt) Read more at amyproctor.squarespace.com ...
The "Martydom Videos" recently released by Al Qaeda have at least two of the 9/11 hijackers saying that the US intervention in Kosovo was on their list of grievances that caused them to participate in the destruction of the World Trade Center. These videos were made about a year before the attacks, while these hijackers were still in training.
The fact that we intervened in Kosovo in their favor completely escapes them. I have to conclude that they don't really care. They are going to attack us, no matter what we do.
Appeasment never works. But it extra-especially-doubleplus doesn't work when your enemy is crazy. The only acceptable end point for them is for us to be converted, enslaved or dead. If we're not willing to come across with one of those three conditions, they aren't interested in our efforts to appease.
I am listening to Rush and heard it on a newsbreak minutes ago.
Perhaps the last time Pelosi got a face lift, the doctor streched her brain instead of her skin.
al-Qaeda is an alarming development in terrorism.
Early terrorism was some combination of nationalist, ideological, or sectarian. As more nation-states emerged, the nationalist character faded into obscurity.
What we're seeing now is post-ideological and post-sectarian terror, combined with a business franchise model for group affiliation.
In short, al-Qaeda should be called McQaeda--fighting against the evils of Western secularism while using one of the prime tools of Western secularism's business practice. (Irony is so ironic.) McDonald's gives you inedible food at a fairly low price. McQaeda gives you Koranic quotes and a theology of salvation through nihilistic violence. At that point, everything becomes a justification for violence. Note that the vast majority of victims of Islamist terror are themselves devout Muslims.
The conflict in Kosovo seemed to be mainly ethnic rather than religious--I don't think any Albanians who were Orthodox Christians identified with the Serbs against Albanians of Muslim background.
Of course in this case what matters is how the Islamo-fascists perceived it, rather than the reality.
For a bunch of Athiests, those Albanians sure seemed intent on destroying churches!
What's surprising about atheists destroying churches? Stalin did it. I think there was a lot of that in Bosnia and Croatia during the warfare of the 1990s--people targeting houses of worship of the enemy group. All it shows is hatred of the other group.
Since you seem to know, who is getting rich from this war? Lay out some facts to back your bold statement. Easy to say, but if you are going to say it, prove it.
Amazing, isn't it?
Not exactly. The south still understands what is at stake and is still providing its young as warriors to the battle. The rot has not spread as deep here as in other parts of the country and we might yet save at least this part.
Thanks for the ping Jan! Will have to wait until tomorrow.
You may prefer to skip it. It will make you sick!
Pelosi voices the 09/10/2006 mindset of the Democrat party and their liberal MSM enablers.
What I notice is where your info comes from. I checked it out. You did some work on this. The Info is suspect as to their motivation as is yours.
Do not add little liberal "try to fool the conservative" lines in your conversation. You are very transparent. Come out and admit you are a liberal.
You can tell one from their conversation
class warfare
Hating affluence(unless they are rich democrats , Rockefeller, Kennedy, Pelosi, the crook, Harry Reid, just to name a few)
Extreme vitriol for Republicans
These are just a few, many more are able to be named as soon as they are pegged. I will give you credit for taking the time and effort to find some liberal places to go to prove your liberal point.
By the way, many of these companies you pointed out were quite profitable and weren't ready for a garage sale before the war.
I just wish you would quit masquerading.
There isn't a business out there that isn't in it to make a profit. A lot of these companies have probably made your little liberal life better.
Conservatism , it works every time, even in this last election. Democrats tried it and it worked. Much to your dismay.
I wonder if she remembers the significance of todays and tomorrows date.
Blow it out your "leftist ear"
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.