In a stunning move, the commander of all US and coalition forces Major General Harry Reid, declared today that the war in Iraq is lost. General Reid handed his engraved sword over to a 19 year old Muslim Jihadist and said "we will go home and fight no more". The two shook hands and posed for a photograph to record the event.
The young Jihadist thanked the General then promptly detonated the suicide vest he wore under his coat, killing all in attendance. Thus ended the surrender ceremony.
I realize this is silly but my point is this, just because you stop fighting doesn't mean they will stop trying to kill you.
The Democrats are only fearful of one thing, success in Iraq. They cannot allow the surge to show any signs of success. They want to cut off funds before the surge has time to work, ensuring it's failure and emboldening our enemies.
Way to go Harry.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
What a bunch of BS.
The Democrats are fearful of only one thing? Success in Iraq.
Do we need to continue to fight terrrorism relentlessly? Yes.
Is there any chance in hell we will win in Iraq? Not in 10,000 years.
The only chance is to carve up the damn country, and put all the Kurd's in one spot (mostly done), the Shiite's in another, and the Sunni's in another. Let them form their own country's and this "might" work.
MrSleep
Since you seem to like history, I will give you some other examples to look at. The British papers were filled with editorials about how the war against Germany was lost many times. Dunkirk for certain, the air battle of Brittan ect. Churchill did not listen to the defeatists even when London was on fire and only the smallest glimmer of hope remained.
Kasserine Pass in North Africa was a disaster for the US, with 6,700 casualties. We simply could not defeat the Nazis in a war against a country that didn't attack us, that was the cry from the anti war isolationists, and many of them were Republicans.
How about these battles. Bull Run, The Peninsula Campaign, Fredericksburg, The Wilderness, Chancellorsville, have you ever heard of them? 300,000 Union Dead. Lincoln is a butcher, the Union will never defeat the confederates on their own ground, we have lost the war, only an idiot would believe it can be won,that was the cry from the Democratic Copperheads then.
I am glad we didn't listen to them then, I hope this nation will not listen to Harry Reid now.
Dear II, I will send my six year old daughter to boot camp next week if that will make you happy.
As for my 13 year old son, he will more than likely fight in this war on terror. He wants to join the armed forces when he gets through college, I would be more than proud to have him serve our nation in uniform.
Now can we leave family out of the comments, please.
Have a super weekend in your little isolationist world.
The British papers were filled with editorials about how the war against Germany was lost many times.
The Brits did lose the war. If the Americans hadn't stepped in, Brits would be speaking German. We all know that.
Kasserine Pass in North Africa was a disaster for the US, with 6,700 casualties. We simply could not defeat the Nazis in a war against a country that didn't attack us, that was the cry from the anti war isolationists, and many of them were Republicans.
The Americans didn't defeat the Germans that way. They were lucky that the Soviets had completely slaughtered the German eastern flank and there was little to worry about afterwards.
That said, I am impressed with your rudimentary knowledge of history and saddened that you readily admit that you would send your children to die to enrich Raytheon and Halliburton. Just sad. That you view your children as gifts to hand over to the fuhrer for martyrdom to the "nation" makes you no different than the "jihadis" you're constantly blathering about.
As far as calling me an isolationist, it's the simple principle of "do unto others...." I am sure you've heard of it. No Iraqis or Afghanis did anything to me, you or America. Iranian gunboats are not menacing off any coast of the US.
You're going to go practice your religion that, last I checked, does not call for war and vengeance.
I am not a cheerleader for Saudi Arabia. That is where Whabism started. The royal family sits on a great deal of the world's oil and if the alternative is a group of Sunni Mullahs running the show, I guess trying to get the Saudis to embrace freedom ever so slowly is better than the group of Mullahs.
Actually, you are a cheerleader for it. You vote for men who can't get enough photos of holding hands with those sickos and you defend that relationship. I'll send you some pom poms to wave at the next public beheading. Saudi is not just where Wahabism started; it is where it is centered and thriving. If the Saudi royals aren't Sunni mullahs to fear, I don't know who could be. They have vice police who beat people violating any religious rules, they make women dress in tents, women are forbidden from driving, they have public beheadings every Friday. And you call that freedom? Of course you do, because you believe anything that W tells you. Then you must believe that after over 30 years of partnership, the US is begging the Saudis to be nicer to their people. You should visit Saudi Arabia and see how much "freedom" their people are enjoying courtesy of US encouragement. While you're in the neighborhood, go to Egypt where the president just changed the constitution to make it conform to the police state he's had for over 25 years and America is right there with him.
Iran isn't the leading state sponsor of terrorism? OK, then who gets that title?
They have been listed as a state sponsor of terrorists since 1984 until today. Even when Yasser Arifat was paling around with Bill and Hilary at the White House, Iran was still on the State sponsors list.
Stop making up nonsense. Support of Hezballah, a small group in Southern Lebanon, can't qualify Iran for #1 on the list. Please get a grip.
And Iran doesn't support Hamas. Why don't you ask Israel about that one, since it's Israel that has been Hamas' #1 supporter for years.
Iran is training insurgents how to kill Americans?? Funny, considering Israelis have been among the captured insurgents in Iraq.
The Iraqis have been putting up one hell of a fight for 4 years and, now that our chicken leaders who said this would be a cakewalk can't take responsibility for getting a beat down, they have to blame someone else. It's quite pathetic. "Oh, the mean Iranians are training Shia, oh, they're training Sunnis too, now they've kissed and made up with their former Taliban enemies". Tomorrow the liars in corporate media will tell us Iran trained the kid from Virginia Tech and crucified Jesus. Geez.
Luis Posada, a known terrorist, is free on bail to figure out an escape route and you see no problem with that. If he was Arab, you'd be beside yourself with outrage, but it seems terrorism is only bad if you like the victims. Hypocrite. There are people locked in Guantanamo on lesser suspicions.
the US has had many unsavory bedfellows in the past,and probably today as well.
That is the understatement of the year. Manuel Noriega, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, the entire Saudi royal family, Parvez Musharraf, Hosni Mubarak, Augusto Pinochet, etc., etc. It is not possible to reconcile your nonsense about America's selfless support of "freedom" with its support of these murderous dictators. These men have oppressed their populations and slaughtered hundreds of thousands and you call that freedom.
As for the your last 'point' about the wealthy against the world, maybe you should look at the Muslim world and realize that Islamic nations do a terrible job at creating economic opportunity for their citizens.
You are stating the obvious and explaining why the "terrorists" are fighting those governments.
Why don't you look at where the money from the oil and other resources of Islamic countries go? The most brutal of the dictators kept in power with American weaponry and training give oil deals to American corporations, take the proceeds of the oil sales and put them in American banks, and they spend the money on weapons and infrastructure projects to keep our military-ndustrial complex afloat. They are all friends.
And when the friends have a spat, our leaders get the people riled up about something and sacrifice your children (because they certainly don't send theirs) to settle the vendetta. Soldiers are disposable according to them. Just ask the soldiers on the USS Liberty, who were bombed by Israel and, 30 years later, are still seeking justice.
http://ussliberty.org/
Ask those soldiers why US leaders continue to defend a foreign nation over them.
The US government made a pact long ago with the Saudi royals that the US would keep them in power so long as the Saudis agreed that all oil transactions would be based on the dollar. This isn't about freedom. It's about money. It always has been and always will be.
Saddam violated that rule when he converted the sale of oil to Euros and Iran is currently shifting all transactions to Euro. Read economics my friend. Follow the money and you'll see what all the hysteria is about. This isn't about nuclear weapons that are 5-10 years away.
This isn't about protecting you or me or random Israeli. Shimon Peres, the DM of Israel, mocked the residents of Sderot last summer when they complained about getting no protection from the rockets hitting their town. Read it for yourself -
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50720
It's about protecting bank holdings. Not yours, not mine, but the holdings of King Abdallah and George Bush.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul319.html
I was not for going to war in Iraq and I think we have made some giant blunders since we have been there.
Having said that, here is the point that keeps getting missed by those of us who want our troops to come home as soon as possible.
"What does A.S.A.P. mean?
If we have any compassion for those 14 million wonderful muslims over there, (and all of the muslims I have ever met are some of the finest people in the world), we will not leave too soon!
If we leave before their government can adquately protect them from the hordes of Iranians who will surely poor across the border by the tens of thousands and mutilate any and all people who were at the least friendly with us, we will see a genocide beyond belief.
Many here is the U.S. seem to say that one U.S. soldier is worth thousands of Muslims in Iraq.
I just am in shock that we have people here that are so blind that they fail to ask the most important question related to compassion there is....What happens if we leave too early?
Historians say that one more year is all that would have been needed to avoid the "Killing Fields" ( A great true story on DVD ) of South East Asia.
I want our troops home, we should never have gone there, but I have compassion for those wonderful muslims there, most Democrats ignore them and their plight.
FAR.
P.S., I said 14 million because those are the number who voted for their government if my memory serves me. I believe the total population is around 20 - 25 million?
FAR.
FAR,
Your view of possible victory is debateable (hindsight is 20/20). That said, I firmly believe that the US, in fact, WON the Vietnam war. All these piddly wars, including Iraq and Afghanistan, are proxy wars. Vietnam was a proxy war between the US and Russia and the current war is a proxy war between the US and Israel, on the one hand, and Europe, China and Russia, on the other over dollar supremacy.
Your fanatic cowboy friend just can't see past the fog of oft-repeated propaganda.
There is absolutely no basis for your suggestion that the US has to stay or else Iranians are going to flood the border to murder Iraqis. Iran has NEVER attacked another country. The same can't be said for most other nations. Also, what's comical about your statement is that it suggests that it's ok for the US to stay and kill Iraqis, aka "insurgents", but we simply can't allow Iran to do that.
I'm thinking that even if Iran doesn't invade, and you must admit that just because they haven't yet is no guarentee they won't. They do a lot of sabre rattling.
Also, the "civil war" may explode as well.
What do you see happening if we were to leave tomorrow, and I will admit, your guess may be right, but what if it isn't?
FAR.
P.S.,
If in the U.S. a bank robber took hostages and started executing them and the SWAT team broke in and killed him, would that be O.K.?
FAR.
The only point from above is that we are killing killers and if we left the Iraq government would just take our place and probably not do as good a job.
I think it is clear that after we leave those "insergents" won't just become poets or something. They are there to try to destroy democracy and not just because we are there, IMHO.
But it would be a shame to have to leave to see who was right.
FAR.
FAR, it cracks me up when we start debating across the Blogosphere. What happened to Cowboy? I came back expecting a lashing (although I've never come across a cowboy who says "toodles"). :-) Cowboy, you ain't from Texas. :-)
Iran does no more or less sabre-rattling than any other country. If I were in that country, and the US president declares me and my people part of an axis of evil, then invades one of the other 3 of the axis, I am going to start preparing for war. This insane standoff has been completely brought upon us by our big-mouth, unhinged president.
I am sure you can understand honor and manhood. Ahmedinejad, just like Bush, isn't going to sit there like a punk while other countries verbally attack him, openly declaring their desire for "regime change". Why should he? America never would.
Honestly, even if there is a civil war in Iraq if we leave, you make it sound as if the people of the Semitic world have never been able to solve their own problems without US troops. Those civilizations have been around a lot longer than America has been on a map. That's very paternal of you, but they will figure it out.
You suggest that the "insurgents" will destroy democracy, as if there is one to destroy. One election does not make a democracy, especially one as flawed and ridiculous as the one that happened in Iraq. I don't know what the resistance will go back to doing when the US leaves but, like I said before, that is something the Iraqis need to figure out because they have to live with it.
Your bank robbery example makes no sense to me.
Have you guys seen this article today?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070422/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_olmert_iran
Now the Israelis are saying that Iran's nuclear program ISN'T a threat.
Let me tell you something guys. These crazies in Tel Aviv and Washington have no idea what they are doing. They have no vision. Everyday a new story. Cowboy, don't get yourself worked up over threats to Israel because those bosom buddies (Israel and Iran) may end up kissing and making up tomorrow.
Another great article.
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=449880&in_page_id=1770&in_a_source=
Cowboy,
I have to hand it to you for doing combat with the intellectual midgets. Keep telling it like it is.
BTW, I just received another "Greeting from Baghdad" from from my good friend Lt. Colonel Dave McCarthy, USMC. I'll post it tomorrow.
Bill
Let's get back to the original point, yes Reid is a wimp.
It's outragious what Reid has said on the Senate Floor:
"When the body bags start coming home,” "it’s time to cut our losses".
"The White House has bombed its way around the globe.”
“International respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly.”
“No one wants us to be there” and that the president’s crusade “has harmed [our] standing in the world.”
“pull out the forces we now have in the region.”
“When the U.S. starts meddling in the internal affairs of sovereign nations, where does it stop?” Reid asked.
“we're starting to resemble a power-hungry imperialist army”
Yeah, Reid would really be a traitor to our Soldiers fighting for freedom by saying all this.
The only problem is these quotes were made by Tom Delay on the floor of the House of Representatives when the U.S. was in Kosovo.
What a bunch of feeb's.....
Post a Comment