Quote from civilian Goldberg: "Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show we mean business."
Quote from Michael Leeden: "First and foremost, we must bring down the terror regimes, beginning with the Big Three: Iran, Iraq, and Syria. And then we have to come to grips with Saudi Arabia"
Later he mentions Lebanon and doesn't even talk about Afganistan or Libya.
they are willing to fight a war, that Pat wishes away
Unlike in the past, today's military is made up mostly of low income rural Whites and inner-city minorities. Members of the ruling class have virtually no family connection to those who fight and die in our foreign wars.
[Neocon] poisition on immigration is suicidal
If it were just immigration, we could write that off as just a silly desire not to appear "racist" like those badboy paleos. It is the combination of immigration with warfare on the "crappy" countries listed above that should make us especially concerned.
paleocons are being overrun by neo-confederates, anarchistic language, and isolationism.
As Neos on this forum never tire of pointing out, Paleocons are currently powerless so we have no real institutions to overrun. Any conservative out of step with the neocon party line is branded a paleo and, sure, that includes a wide variety.
If the ruling clique is suicidal as you say then times are desperate. True conservatives must find alternatives to the Neocon establishment that has sold us down the river.
That's a mouthful. I suspect today's military is more upscale in socio-economic class than it ever has been since it has been a substantial force. That's what the generals seem to think.
Quote from Michael Leeden: "First and foremost, we must bring down the terror regimes, beginning with the Big Three: Iran, Iraq, and Syria. And then we have to come to grips with Saudi Arabia"
Syria and Iran spronsor Islamic Jihad, a constituent group of Al Qaeda.
They sponsor Hizbullah which has declared war on the US. They are enemies of the US. What don't you understand?
Later he mentions Lebanon and doesn't even talk about Afganistan or Libya.
We have taken care of Afghanistan. Lebanon is Syrian occupied territory. Libya has been fairly quiet since we bombed them.
Ledeen has said intellectually unsound things. When he speaks of continuous revolution and change as being true America, he echoes Jefferson's lunacy.
I wrote:
"they are willing to fight a war, that Pat wishes away"
Longshanks responded
Unlike in the past, today's military is made up mostly of low income rural Whites and inner-city minorities. Members of the ruling class have virtually no family connection to those who fight and die in our foreign wars.
How is this different than the 19th century?
I wrote:
"[Neocon] poisition on immigration is suicidal"
Longshanks responded
If it were just immigration, we could write that off as just a silly desire not to appear "racist" like those badboy paleos. It is the combination of immigration with warfare on the "crappy" countries listed above that should make us especially concerned.
Because they are willing to face threats abroad, but not restrict immigration?
This is an intellectually and historically unsound policy, but not evil.
I wrote:
"paleocons are being overrun by neo-confederates, anarchistic language, and isolationism."
Longshanks responds:
As Neos on this forum never tire of pointing out, Paleocons are currently powerless so we have no real institutions to overrun. Any conservative out of step with the neocon party line is branded a paleo and, sure, that includes a wide variety.
1. I said paleos are over run by neo-confederates, not that paleos were overruning institutions.
2. I'm not Frum. I differentiate between Pale-conservatives, libertarians, and right-anarchists. It is sometimes difficult to differentiate between paleo-libertarians, paleo-conservatives, and Confederate apologists.
If the ruling clique is suicidal as you say then times are desperate. True conservatives must find alternatives to the Neocon establishment that has sold us down the river.
Quite true. However, the paleo position is untenable in light of both history (we have always been an empire) and the Clash of Civilizations.
I believe that Fusionist Conservatism needs to be revised towards a more nationalist end.
We need to fight Islamists, Communists, Globalists, post-nationalists, the Gramsciite New Left, and trans-national progressives. (I realize that there is an overlap)
Ron
PS. You may find an article I wrote last week to be interesting.
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article2206.html