Posted on 01/24/2011 12:54:08 PM PST by John R. Guardiano
...Foreign Policy magazine’s John Rogin reports that Grover Norquist wants to “‘start a discussion’ about leaving Afghanistan among the ‘center-right.’” He wants to “educate the conservative masses about the costs of the war in the hopes of shifting conservative opinion” and effecting an American defeat.
Oh sure, Norquist didn’t say he wants America to lose in Afghanistan, but he might as well have: because that’s what an American withdrawal would mean: an American defeat...
The conservative coalition, of course, includes three distinct types of conservatives: defense and national security hawks, social and cultural cons, and economic or free-market conservatives.
Norquist is decidedly in the latter camp and seemingly antagonistic of late to cultural and defense cons.
Thus, in addition to suggesting that it might be OK to lose in Afghanistan, Norquist also has joined the advisory board of the homosexual advocacy organization, GOProud, which seeks special rights and privileges for lesbians and homosexuals.
But not even David Frum, the supposed beta noire of “real conservatives,” wants to jettison two-thirds of the conservative coalition.
Frum instead wants to modulate conservatives’ political approach, not abandon conservatism altogether. Frum, in fact, is a conservative, albeit an iconoclastic and unconventional conservative.
Here’s my proposal to which I welcome Norquists’ response: How about a “conversation” about raising taxes to help reduce the deficit?
Or maybe we can have a “dialogue” about the “public option”? Or better yet, what do you say we “talk about” how to enforce “fair trade” on China, Chile and Mexico?
Now, I’m not saying we should do any of these things, mind you; I’m only saying that we conservatives need to start talking about these things!
Of course, I rather doubt Norquist would welcome a “conversation” about these matters. He’d rightly say these subjects are off limits...
(Excerpt) Read more at johnrguardiano.com ...
I'd thought that was part of the reason he'd backed off commenting on the rest of us ~ that he was fearful of our getting wise and booting him out.
So, why hasn't he been booted out?
Jim What does FUGN mean? sorry if its a stupid question, and thanks for Free republic!
I agree with you GunRunner
I’m assuming GN = Grover Norquist.
I’ll leave the first half to you to guess.
F yoU Grover Norquist
Yes, it’s definitely “manipulation” on my part! And I’m not a “wannabe”; I’m a “has-been”! Get it right! :)
Is there anyone still out there who does NOT know that Norquist is an Islamist tool and has been since the late nineties when he married his Palestinian wife?
It was Norquist who abused GWB’s trust and stage-managed the administration’s frantic “muslim outreach” after 9/11 and gave CAIR the keys to the liquor cabinet.
What kind of person calls Norquist or Frum “right-wingers”???
BY the way, you can’t have a one-legged stool and sit comfortably.
Not exactly sure. Someone started up a FUBO campaign a couple years ago and it caught on. I think it may have been patterned after the famous Dixie Chicks t-shirt slogan “FUTK” when they were having their dispute with Toby Keith. Someone sent me a FUBO oval sticker a couple years ago which I pasted on my powerchair. Get lots of compliments on it down at the VA and at Tea Party Rallies.
<emphasis>(Excerpt) Read more at [INSERT BLOGGER URL HERE]</emphasis><P>Why not just post it here?
did you get iced or do you never respond to posts?
I think we should POUND the bad guys and then get out. It is not the US taxpayers job to build up a country for those primitive knuggledraggers!
Nation building in a place like Afghanistan is an activity that is doomed to fail. Either be ready to fight forever or just pull out. There’s no other option. No amount of excuse making or propaganda will change that reality.
Thanks Jim
Better than that, I’ve got a ‘bot program that does it automatically.
That’s right. It means FReep You Grover Norquist.
Here’s Jackie Mason explaining FReeping:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95TZAlWXmZ0
Well, they’re welcome to try...
They’re bit out-numbered and out-financed, though.
Yep !!!!!!!!!!
Frankly, I think these guys have miscalculated. They may bring down the party with them, but they’re not going to continue having the same kind of influence.
This is just the latest provocation.
Saying that you don’t give a damn about cultural conservatives means, in practice, that you don’t give a damn about morality. Right and wrong, who cares?
Well, a lot of Americans still care. No way in hell that these jerks can survive without that vote. And they’ve used up the last of their “lesser of two evils” business. If they try to come up with another McCain or Romney type candidate in the next election, the Republican Party is simply going to die. And these guys can all retire with their ill-earned loot and mumble in the corner.
Can't say I disagree with you given the situation as outlined.
But when we bring everything home, we should also make it clear that any further use of Crapistan as a base to launch 9-11 type attacks on America will result in a mushroom cloud over Kandahar or any other Crapistan city we deem responsible.
Truthfully, there are some goals that need to be set for Afghanistan, based on the reality on the ground.
The first of these is to accept that the Karzai government is worthless, so we have to assume that it will be replaced by something. What that is, is a good question.
Second, Afghanistan needs to be subdivided, literally or figuratively, into a north half and a south half. The south, Pushtun half, crosses the border into Pakistan, which might eventually become part of Pakistan. Or that part of Pakistan may become part of a new South Afghanistan. Just an issue to keep in mind.
The north is much more useful to the US, and we are building a $100m intelligence base at Mazar-i-Sharif, because of its uniquely strategic location.
Third, because NATO only has 150,000 or so personnel, augmented with another 150,000 or so fairly useless Afghan army personnel, there is no way we can perform the security for a nation the size of Texas, with 30 million people, next door to Pakistan, which is about the same size as Turkey and has 177 million people, about the same as half the population of the United States.
Think about how only 150,000 soldiers could control all of the US East of the Mississippi, and you have a pretty good idea of what the situation is here. They cannot even hold territory outside of some bases.
And there is no great plan to make the Afghans any more capable, be it in a year or ten or fifty.
So the question becomes not one of whether to withdraw or not, but how we can turn over the combat side of things to the Afghan and Pakistan armies, so we don’t have to, without an utter collapse of the region.
An interesting way to define victory.
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.