A Message to All the Cut and Run Freepers Currently Polluting Free Republic

Friday, November 24, 2006 | Kristinn

[FreeReign]

Here's what we're dealing with: No pursuit into mosques without Iraqi troops. Loudspeakers in mosques permitted to broadcast prayers for the defeat of America.

I don't see that in this copy of a Jan 03 ROE for U.S. Military Forces in Iraq.

Do you have a source to support your statement?

[BigSkyFreeper]

Things were not wonderful under Saddam. They aren't wonderful now, either. But back then, they were stable. Now they are not. Before, you were less likely to be blown up on the street.

Probably because the people living under Saddam's thumb weren't allowed such "freedoms" to blow themselves and everyone else around them up, because even having something simple as a pistol in your possession meant a death sentence.

Under a dictatorship, you either tow the line or die.

[sonic109]

Premise #1: Muslims are not capable of making Democracy work
I tend to agree with you on that point my friend.
I believe that if you're gong to fight everyone has to die , everything has to be destroyed ( as in dresden ) otherwise it drags on forever . Americans never stood by long wars.

[Fred Nerks]

Cock-a-doodle-doo... I surrender!

[jan in Colorado]

You owe me a new keyboard!

[MaineVoter2002]

One of the major complaints out soldiers have is the confusion of the ROE because they're changing almost daily. If your copy is jan. 2003, you may as well toss it. It's obsolete

[BigSkyFreeper]

Jan 2003 predates the invasion of Iraq. The ROE would completely worthless now, since we're now dealing with insurgents.

[BigSkyFreeper]

One of the major complaints out soldiers have is the confusion of the ROE because they're changing almost daily. If your copy is jan. 2003, you may as well toss it. It's obsolete

Engaging the enemy doesn't change overall. Our troops are told not to destroy property, even if that means a gold domed mosque, or schools, or hospitals, which are used by our enemy to store large weapons caches, because they know our troops have a set of rules to abide by.

[melancholy]

How are you going to get the American people to back you on this? It would seem at present the terrorist are not terrorizing the American people enough to hold our ground that we have.

We can thank God and Bush for that.

The orders for bombing Iran should be divulged to the big four in a closed meeting with the Prez and VP one day before the bombing. The purpose of the meeting is FYI only not to take their permission. Klintoon didn't and never went to the UN before the Balkan war. We can't afford the liberal leaks and the Sy Hersch crowd warning the Iranians. This is not a poll taking exercise and it is essential that Bush does this before leaving office because he shouldn't trust a RAT or McPain_in_the_poopa to do it.

I am saying the American people need a bloody face before we are willing do what must be done in that part of the world.

I repeat, thank God and Bush we didn't get a bloody face. However, I wouldn't sell the American people short, they will understand when all of a sudden things calm down in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria capitulates, al Sadr is marginalized or killed, and no more threat from Iran. Guess what else: the 6-party talks will become a real party! LOL

In addition, it's a huge message to Russia and China: we're the ONLY superpower and it will remain that way. Let them sell their hardware to somebody else and they should be careful about what they sell.

I pray somebody is listening.

[processing please hold]

If you state that you support open borders, they'll stop calling you a troll

Ain't that the truth. I'm a border bot myself and if they don't like it, they can lump it. My country means more to me than their opinion of me.

[ZULU]

"prove that a purely civil, non-partisan government could work. This would provide an example of stability for the region, in theory.

Personally, I'm not sure it can,"

I agree with you. I think that was an overly ambitious and optimistic aspiration, given the history and culture of this area.

"But whatever we do, we have to be perceived as winning, or this is going to lead to even worse things in the future for all concerned."

No question about it. The Islamists are watching and waiting to take any propaganda benefit they can from this situation if we are perceived as having failed.

[ZULU]

"that may mean no more Mr. Nice Guy."

You don't win wars by being Mr. Nice Guy. SOmething the Democraps can't seem to realize.

[ZULU]

It starts in the schools.

American children are taught that patriotism is passe, that cultures are relative, that western civilization is evil, etc.

This is reinfornced by the major media and mainstream churches and the result is generations of Americans who have lost their moral and social compasses.

[kkmo9]

bookmark

[BigSkyFreeper]

What too many Americans fail to realize is that the war in IRaq is really a battle ina greater war against Islam.

Until many American's wake up and realize what Iraq is part of, every conflaguration up to that point will be an uphill slog. Many American's don't have the courage, faith and conviction to look terrorism in the face and erradicate the scourage that is terrorism, off the face of the earth. We're not engaged in a Global War On Islam, we're engaged in a Global War On Terror. That's where the "Axis Of Evil" is significant.

[ZULU]

"But I've come to the conclusion that there is nothing more we can do to achieve "victory" in Iraq, for what it's worth."

What you are saying is true, had we pulled out right after accomplishing th goals you enumerated. However, if even if did leave Iraq under such circumstances, we still have the problem of Iran and Syria.

One of the many reasons for taking out Saddam and invading Iraq, should have been using it and Afghanistan to eliminate the Ayatollahs in Iran, and using Israel to help us clean out the Baathists in Syria. Where we failed was in turning a punitive expedition in force into a social service experiment, using American money and lives.

"So what was one of the first things they did?

They wrote into their constitution that Islam would be the state religion.

When I saw that, I realized that our efforts were doomed to go down the drain.

The closest analogy I could make is permitting the Germans to freely re-elect the Nazis to power after their defeat in World War II."

VERY WELL SAID. Which is one of the reasons we should never have gotten into a quagmire there, of trying to treat these savages like civilized people. They are savages, regardless of how politely they may speak or how educated they may appear. They are savages because they are driven by a primitive cult, masquerading as a religion, which drives their entire world view on every subject.

In our dealings with them, our own, immediate best interests should not be paramount, they should be exclusive. As long as these people follow Islam, and as long as they do not modernize their faith, they will never change their behavior patterns.

We have even witnessed the weasel who officiates Iraq running off to make nice with the Ayatollahs and Baathists.

"But if the war in Iraq is but a battle in a greater war with Islam, why in tarnation did we permit it to remain an intolerant Islamic state? This is "victory"? What might BE "victory"?"

Good question. Short of forcibly converting these savages, the best we can hope to do is isolate them in their own countries, remove them from those countires they have already invaded, and draw a line in the sand beyond which they cannot cross without immediate military consequences the results of which would be far too painful for even these fanatics to bear.

I have long been an advocate of getting Muslims out of the United States, stopping their immigration here, and shutting down their madrasshes and mosques. The same thing must be done in western Europe, in subsaharan Africa and in those areas of Asia not already domianted by Islam.

The time for tolerance and negotiating with these people has come and gone.

They are committed to dominating the world and forcibly converting all non-Muslims or reducing them to second class citizenship. Unless the entire non-Sialmic world - Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, etc, wake up and face this, their children will grow up in a country which looks very much like what Afghanistan did under the Taliban, or Saudi Arabia looks like today.

[ZULU]

"Even if it was a good idea, which it is not, Iraq is not ours to divide. They elected a sovereign government, you will recall, and the Iraqis themselves don't consider this option."

The pros and cons of dividing Iraq have been disputed for some time. AS you can see from my posting I believe they have some merit, but I also understand the dangers involved as expressed by those who opposed it.

However, Iraq BECAME ours by right of conquest. The mistake we made there was treating the situation in a manner any different than NAZI Germany after WW2.

We won, they lost. We should make the rules and they should abide by them or face dire consequences.

When we get away from that line of thinking, we get embroiled in liberal philophical nonesense - the kind of tripe that created Viet Nam.

[The Old Hoosier]

Correction: we know that someone wrote a classified memo about recruiting suicide bombers, including bombers who could hit American interests. We don't know whether they tried to recruit, and if they did, how many recruits they got. If they ever got any, what happened to them? How come none of them ever came to bomb our interests?

We certainly didn't know any of this before the war.

On the other hand, will we invade any country that secretly recruits suicide bombers this way? I'd be willing to guess that there are several.

[The Old Hoosier]

Okay, but we've just foisted "freedom" upon a people that isn't culturally attuned to Western freedoms. The people there seem uninterested, unable and unwilling to exercise it responsibly.

Given that, can we say they're better off now that they're less safe and live in great instability, than they were when they lived under an authoritarian regime but they weren't getting blown up every day?

I really don't know the answer to that question, but I do know that the instability sucks for us, since it means we have to stay there without an end in sight.

[The Old Hoosier]

Nice non-argument. You're sure a smart fella.

I assume you think it's a good thing the Iraqi Christians are being forced to move to other countries. Our policymakers do bear some responsibility for the consequences of the invasion -- both good and bad -- don't they?