MAD DOGS OF WAR - Neocon pit-bulls snarl at Syria: 'You're next!'

Antiwar.com ^ | 5/7/03 | Justin Raimondo

[ASA Vet]

How about if only Israel has beaches?

[ASA Vet]

How about if Israel has beaches all the way around?

[sinkspur]

I think Rummy will retire with 'health issues' if this disloyal rift can be exploited.

It's already over. Only isolationist paleos like Fleming want to get rid of Rumsfeld.

You libertarians can't catch a break, can you?

[JohnGalt]

Actually, my neo-isolationist friend, I think it was your side who advocated 'Britian and America versus the world'.

[sinkspur]

Actually, my neo-isolationist friend, I think it was your side who advocated 'Britian and America versus the world'.

Actually, it was Britain, America, and 47 other countries against Russia, Germany and France (three aiders and abettors of Saddam Hussein). The three pipsqueaks lost.

[robowombat]

The ideological garbage subtracted what is so bad about what is being said here. The elimination of the Assad-Baath regime in Damascus would bring tears to the eyes of those who are content with Syria being able to keep a substantial part of the IDF permanently tied up covering the nortern frontier. The squelching of the Assad regime and the subsequent demise of Hamas and Hizbollah in Lebanon are cause and effect related actions. The final domino in this sequence is the so called Palestine Authority. Shorn of protectors its ability to continue to orchestrate violence also dries up and the Israelis have more than enough muscle to effectivelt tame Paliland for good. A very tame Pali entity that knows better than to even think of annoying the Israelis would be a pleasant final endstate bring down the curtain on the endless Plai terror war. So what is so bad with this scenario? Except if you want the Arabs to win since you viscerally hate both the US and Israel.

[JohnGalt]

Or if you are a conservative, you believe the government should make its case for war and get a declaration of war to secure the stated end.

Otherwise its just a political scheme hatched up by Ivy League tea sippers willing to put their neighbor's kid in harms way.

But I understand, there are a lot of Wilsonian liberals coming to this site these days...

[JohnGalt]

Hard to tell they lost from the currency markets...

[headsonpikes]

Monsieur Raimondo seems to be le petit chien howling at the Moon.

Not a Dog of War, but a Dog of Yap.

[george wythe]

President Bush is committed, pretty far down the road. The logic of events says you can't go halfway. You can't liberate Iraq, then quit."

Context is your friend, Justin.

Kristol has explained himself several times, such as his appearance in Nightline a couple of weeks ago.

He just means that the Iraqi war opened the floodgates of democracy and anti-terrorism in the region.

He does not anticipate another war during Bush's first term; quite the contrary, he expects the Syrians to clean up their act, the Iranian mullahs to be defeated from the inside, and the Saudi Arabia princes to experiment with a limited constitutional monarchy.

[Billthedrill]

One of the clues to the somewhat mysterious abuse of the neologism "neocon" is precisely who is abusing it. This is an example. I do not mean that in a kind way.

[NeoCaveman]

Actually, it was Britain, America, and 47 other countries against Russia, Germany and France (three aiders and abettors of Saddam Hussein). The three pipsqueaks lost.

Four pipsqueaks, you forgot Belgium

[Chancellor Palpatine]

For your amusement

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Justine won't be interested in that pic at all. He only gets a rush from a nice pic of Barney Frank.

[Seydlitz]

Or if you are a conservative, you believe the government should make its case for war and get a declaration of war to secure the stated end.

While a declaration of war is ideal, conservatives know their history. Accordingly, they know that military action between the United States and foreign powers have been undeclared since John Adams and the Quasi-War with France. Innumerable examples of the same are rife throughout American history. Secondly, the case was made to the American public. The link between the anti-western tyrannies of the Middle East, be they jihadist or pan-Arab secularist, is a story as old as most of the countries involved (for example, see former Lebanon CIA officer Robert Baer's "See No Evil" on how these terrrorist groups and nations work together on a regular basis). It was a linkage rejected only by those who expected the administration to produce a hand-written note reading, "Dear Saddam, I love working with you and Assad to kill Crusaders and Zionists. Hugs & Kisses, Osama"

The denial of this linkage undertaken by administration critics reminds one of Dr. Samuel Johnson demonstrating to Boswell how Boswell could not prove the existence of Canada to Johnson if Johnson chose not to believe him.

Otherwise its just a political scheme hatched up by Ivy League tea sippers willing to put their neighbour's kids in harm's way.

Having graduated from an Ivy League, and grown up in a town with an Ivy League university, I can assure you that there aren't enough militaristic Ivy Leaguers to fill a mini-van. To ascribe malign intent to such a non-existent cabal is little more than a profession of ignorance and desperation. As for Rummy, he was a US Navy pilot, so I think he was willing to put his ass on the line for others. I bet you if you asked the men and women in today's military, they would be more than happy to put their asses on the line for him.

Moreover, the libertarian line that anything done by the government is something done by "the Establishment" with other people's lives and money is getting stale. If Bush's team finds war easier because it is fought by other people's kids, then you find pompous moral posturing to be easy because you hide behind the courage and bravery of others. So it goes.

I understand where you are coming from, as I am a registered Libertarian. I voted Libertarian since coming of voting age until the 2000 election. The end of the Cold War meant a more dangerous world, and the Libertarians have not been realistic about the tough measures that must be taken to protect this nation. Our good buddies in the Islamic understand two things: Cold steel and hot lead. Anything else is interpreted by them as cowardice, and only encourages them to further acts of violence. Murdered American innocents are the unacceptable result of passivity and petty moralizing. It ain't pretty, but it is reality.

[dighton]

Smash All Zionist-Devil Neocon Running Mad-Dog Pit Bulls!

[hchutch]

What a lot of ranting and raving.

And it's all those dreadful, all-powerful "neo-cons" that are the problem.

Dreadful? Hell, all they are doing is advocating policies in conjunction of what most Americans think ought to be done after 9/11: Stay strong, hit back, and STOP APOLOGIZING.

All-powerful? *snort* If we neo-conservatives WERE, let's just say a whole lotta terrorist-sponsoring regime would not be there any more, for starters.

Mr. Raimondo just doesn't get it. The neo-conservatives are powerful because they are RIGHT, not the other way around.

[Mr. Mojo]

Spot on post.

[gedeon3]

So what is the problem? All those groups and the syrian regime are terrorists. Is it wrong to speak the truth, and right to accept lies from terrorists and left wingers? Of course, when north korea acts like a dog, they are not bad guys, we are the bad guys. This article is nothing but communist/terrorist b.s.

[BlackElk]

Did Justine get jilted by a boyfriend? Justine ought not to take the name of a patriot and baseball champion like Yogi Berra in vain.