Posted on 02/18/2007 6:49:58 AM PST by Teófilo
Hmm, do you believe that American people in 1918 were ready for the war in the vast steppes of Eurasia? How many millions of soldiers could be sent for this purpose? How the logistical problems would be solved? What justification could be provided AT THAT TIME (without the hindsight derived from Solzhenitsyn)?
Do you know the future? Do you know from which direction new dangers will come ten years from now?
Did you read story about Cain and Abel? It was not about Cain refusing to look after his brother. Cain paid too much attention to his brother, so much that he murdered him out of jealousy.
Respectfully, you and I have deep disagreements. That is because you very much disagree with anything cognizable as the conservative movement. Paleo conservatism is the ideology of the old Eurodiployakkers who wept over the demise of their way of life when WWI broke out. Secret covenants secretly arrived at created the spaghetti bowl of interlocking commitments without which WW I would never have been possible but, never mind....
Blood and soilism is NOT conservatism. Bismarck was NOT a conservative. Neither is the Rockford Institute, Chuck Hagel, Weepy Walter Jones, antiwar.com, Justin(e) Raimondo, or paleoPatrick on matters of foreign and military policy.
Leadership has the obligation, ummm, to lead. That's why they call it.... The US troops were already in Europe (bear in mind Patton's views on the similar situation at the end of WWII). Some were closing in on Ekaterinberg when the Romanovs were massacred. That Lenin died in bed is a moral indictment of Wilson. In 1918, there were capable green and white armies in the field attacking the red and deserving of our assistance.
What justification?????? Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky were Marxist-Leninists who murdered their way to control of a major nation with massive resources. No more justification necessary.
Do I know the future? As Richard Weaver wrote: Ideas have consequences. The soviet idea had obvious consequences to come that needed preventive war.
BTW, Cain killed Abel and then whined that he was not his brother's keeper. Paleos and other foreign policy liberals and wimps NEVER want to assert their moral obligations by way of action in defense of their brothers. It was Cain's way of saying: "Don't blame Cain, Cain is a paleo who was minding his own business."
I do not know from what direction new dangers may arise. That is no excuse for paralysis. As Ted the Swimmer might say (another Cain lookalike), we will cross that bridge when we come to it. We should also remember that an undue adherence to consistency is the hobgoblin of....
Respectfully, you and I have deep disagreements. That is because you very much disagree with anything cognizable as the conservative movement. Paleo conservatism is the ideology of the old Eurodiployakkers who wept over the demise of their way of life when WWI broke out. Secret covenants secretly arrived at created the spaghetti bowl of interlocking commitments without which WW I would never have been possible but, never mind....
Blood and soilism is NOT conservatism. Bismarck was NOT a conservative. Neither is the Rockford Institute, Chuck Hagel, Weepy Walter Jones, antiwar.com, Justin(e) Raimondo, or paleoPatrick on matters of foreign and military policy.
Leadership has the obligation, ummm, to lead. That's why they call it.... The US troops were already in Europe (bear in mind Patton's views on the similar situation at the end of WWII). Some were closing in on Ekaterinberg when the Romanovs were massacred. That Lenin died in bed is a moral indictment of Wilson. In 1918, there were capable green and white armies in the field attacking the red and deserving of our assistance.
What justification?????? Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky were Marxist-Leninists who murdered their way to control of a major nation with massive resources. No more justification necessary.
Do I know the future? As Richard Weaver wrote: Ideas have consequences. The soviet idea had obvious consequences to come that needed preventive war.
BTW, Cain killed Abel and then whined that he was not his brother's keeper. Paleos and other foreign policy liberals and wimps NEVER want to assert their moral obligations by way of action in defense of their brothers. It was Cain's way of saying: "Don't blame Cain, Cain is a paleo who was minding his own business."
I do not know from what direction new dangers may arise. That is no excuse for paralysis. As Ted the Swimmer might say (another Cain lookalike), we will cross that bridge when we come to it. We should also remember that an undue adherence to consistency is the hobgoblin of....
Your optimism is very fervent.
ESAD!
Cliches.....no more.....ping
Don't...worry...I..reached...the bottom of the barrel!
-Theo
Last June, the Los Angeles Times reported how the ranking member on the defense appropriations subcommittee has a brother, Robert Murtha, whose lobbying firm represents 10 companies that received more than $20 million from last year's defense spending bill.
"Clients of the lobbying firm KSA Consulting -- whose top officials also include former congressional aide Carmen V. Scialabba, who worked for Rep. Murtha as a congressional aide for 27 years -- received a total of $20.8 million from the bill," the L.A. Times reported.
In early 2004, according to Roll Call, Mr. Murtha "reportedly leaned on U.S. Navy officials to sign a contract to transfer the Hunters Point Shipyard to the city of San Francisco."
Laurence Pelosi, nephew of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, at the time was an executive of the company which owned the rights to the land.
The same article also reported how Mr. Murtha has been behind millions of dollars worth of earmarks in defense appropriations bills that went to companies owned by the children of fellow Pennsylvania Democrat, Rep. Paul Kanjorski.
Meanwhile, the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan campaign-finance watchdog group, lists Mr. Murtha as the top recipient of defense industry dollars in the current 2006 election cycle.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060620-083859-8753r.htm
" November 12, 2006
In the end, Jack Murtha got my vote
By Pedro O. Vega AKA TEOFILO
As published today in The Johnstown Tribune-Democrat."
smoothsailing : can we use this ?
http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r320/smoothsailing_02/Jihad_Against_TroopSurge.jpg
Did you note the Murtha supporter and voter here ?
I still stand by what I said then and by my actions. Now, what if Mr. Murtha proves me wrong? Well, in that case, there's always the next election, and my next ballot my look different.
I am generally conservative, but I am not a Lemming. I will not follow crowds or succumb to ideological peer pressure. I will not vote on a single issue other than pro-Life. I'll vote based upon the big picture.
You may agree with me, disagree with me, etc., but this is the nature of the beast. I followed my conscience. You disagree? Fine. Follow your own.
Like Forrest Gump said, "That's all I have to say about that." =================
In the end, Jack Murtha got my vote
BY PEDRO O. VEGA
I voted to re-elect John Murtha to Congress. It was not an easy decision and my support comes with strings attached. Let me share with you how I reached that decision, and what my expectations are now.
Diana Irey came as close as anyone in the past 32 years to defeating Murtha. She did take one-third of the ballots, and that’s respectable. But it soon became obvious to me that the GOP gave her only token support. The party wrote her off as unelectable.
Then, there were the errors in Irey’s campaign. Although lucid and telegenic, Irey was unable to articulate what she would do differently from Murtha in the district.
Also, although Irey expressed many of the same objections and fears I had about Murtha’s “redeployment” plan from Iraq, she failed to explain how she would increase congressionally mandated accountability in the war and rein in runaway spending.
In the end, Irey’s message sounded shallow and one-dimensional.
Murtha also did something that took me by surprise and made me rethink my support of his candidacy: He reacted to my Oct. 8 column (“This voter is yearning for the Murtha of old”) and sent me a personal letter, along with an information package detailing his positions.
I think he sensed that I expressed the misgivings of a section of the electorate who had been his unconditional supporters, but who were skeptical of his Iraq War stance.
The fact that he took the time to explain himself to me increased my estimation of him and, although I was not entitled to any explanations from Irey’s camp, I half-expected a similar note and explanations from her addressing my misgivings regarding her candidacy.
None came.
Lest anyone think that I felt so flattered by Murtha’s attention that I voted for him, let me say that I wasn’t. I read all of his material and, aside from a very sobering assessment of the critical state of the Army – and that’s an argument that I can readily understand – none of the other writings and transcripts he provided really addressed the issue of how a unilateral, unconditional retreat from Iraq would serve our long-term national interest.
Is an Islamic Republic of Iraq in our national interest? Will the countries in the Middle East be happy to receive a flood of refugees from a massive civil war? Would Iran and the Iraqi Shiites form a political union? Will they then be able to control the price of oil in a whim?
Would other countries in the region then follow their lead? Will an assertive, imperial Iran be in a position to challenge the United States and the West militarily and economically? Will Iran bet on American weakness and lack of credibility to impose its will upon us?
Do Murtha and the Demo-cratic Party leadership believe that a unilateral retreat would hold no such lasting consequences?
Doesn’t Murtha even ask himself these questions?
So why did I vote for him?
Look. Irey’s momentum fizzled early in the race. But even if she had been elected, she would have had very little influence in Congress, while Murtha appeared to be heading to a senior leadership position from which he would be able to influence both the prosecution of the war and our region’s recovery.
I reasoned, too, that, if I caught his attention once, I may be able to catch it again and perhaps influence him through respectful reason and dialogue, as I had been trying to do.
It seemed to me that my own credibility to ask him the tough questions would be enhanced if I could speak to him as a supporter rather than as an adversary.
Thus, I voted for him.
My vote also represents an act of faith in Murtha as a person. I fully expect that he will moderate his opposition to the Iraq War by working with President Bush on a solution that tends both to the welfare of our troops and to our long-term interest in the Middle East.
I expect Murtha to enhance our ability and power to face down Islamic fascism and terrorism worldwide, and not to undermine our credibility by even giving the impression that we are “cutting and running.”
And please, no more photo-ops and flesh-pressing with the Code Pinkers. OK?
Mr. Murtha, I gave you my vote. Now, I’ll have to hold you accountable. I trust you want to do the right thing.
But when and if I perceive that you are not, I’ll be here to remind you of the fact.
Congratulations, sir, on your re-election to Congress.
Thank you, I appreciate it. I call 'em the way I see 'em, with the lights God gave me.
-Theo
Obviously, you did not read the original piece and are slamming me out of anger and prejudice. So be it. I am done with you.
-Theo
Yes I did.
79,612 voters in the 12th Congessional District voted for Diana Irey, roughly 40% of votes cast.
Those 79,612 voters need not justify their vote to me. I'm proud to be in their company.
There are many examples of Murtha helping himself at the expenses of the taxpayers.
Lots of money was 'liberated' for his personal benefit and for the benefit of his friends and family.
If a republican did a fraction of what Murtha did, they would be in prison.
and the media helps cover it up by not reporting it aggressively...if at all.
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.
