WND : Public Reax to Antonella Barba's Veterans' Memorial "Performance"
WorldNetDaily reports that Antonella Barba's antics at the National WWII Veterans Memorial (NSFW images here) won't get her booted off the show by Fox, despite the fact that many members of the public are none too pleased with her. They sample a few opinions from around the internet, including the following:
"The photos of this young woman Antonella Barba on American Idol taken at the WWII Memorial are disrespectful and she should not be allowed to continue on the show. By allowing her to stay, Fox and "American Idol" are saying it is OK for her and other "Idol" contestants to break laws at war memorials, trample all over them and pose half nude in the waters of them. ... Fox and "Idol" would be saying, 'Hey, next year go take off half your clothes, jump in the waters in Pearl Harbor at the USS Arizona Memorial in Oahu, Hawaii, and pose like Anotnella Barba did.'"
1
If someone wants to hump your mama's tombstone and take pictures, you'd be upset! USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 01, 2007 04:10 AM (2OHpj)
2
What part of, "this was her manager's idea" do you not understand? I have a manager. I know where these hare-brained ideas originate, and it isn't with the talent (I'm using the word talent loosely, in both her case and mine).
Of course, in my case I have a good manager who has good ideas and instincts... it's just her client who sucks. ;^)
Posted by: Hucbald at March 01, 2007 02:05 PM (Nxezv)
3
I'm just getting carried away. It will most likely pass when the next Sheehanite actually does something willfully destructive. Now those types I could really get carried away with! USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 01, 2007 05:58 PM (2OHpj)
4
I at first was bothered when I saw it. But I have to ask this, many of the men who died were in their late teens and early twenties. They were from all walks of life. Ask yourself if they would object to having a memorial for them where a hot woman gets down to the nitty gritty for them. Having been a young service man one I can say it was a poor choice for a backdrop. And it was a nice choice for a model. It also shows how ignorant some people really are about our American history.
Posted by: SeeMonk at March 01, 2007 06:44 PM (yKwZ2)
I see it your way. It doesn't bother me that much. But it probably bothers the families who've lost sons and daughters in a war. For that reason alone it's wrong. But I'm not offended cause I don't think she meant it disrespectfully. She's just clueless.
I find it disconcerting and disturbing that you sanctify the memorial yet ignore or forget why the memorial exists. The memorial exists because courageous men died to ensure that this young woman would have the right to do exactly what she is doing. A right that you cannot exercise is a right that you do not have.
If your object to her actions were from a moralist point of view suggesting that her posing demonstrated a decay in the moral fabric of this nation that would be one thing.
However to suggest that her posing in a fountain whose purpose is to remind the nation of what our freedom cost in human terms is wrong transposes the sanctity of the memorial from the true meaning of the memorial to the stone edifice as if the fountain itself were sacred rather then the ideas it represents.
doriangrey !!! From a "moralist point of view" How do the families of those dead vets feel when she uses thier memorial for a striptease? I'm willing to ignore nearly anything that consenting adults do behind closed doors. I'm having a little trouble ignoring what seems to be a callous disregard for the feelings of others by this kind of act.
Compared to the Islamic Thinkers trampling, and ripping the American flag on a public sidewalk, this IS pretty weak stuff. It is still a sign of disrespect on her part.
I NEVER ignore why any of our war memorials exist!
I choose not to ignore it when someone disregards the sanctity of those memorials. If someone wants to really pick a fight over this ... fine! Let me spell it out for you. Her FREEDOM to do something disrespectful, thoughtless, and stupid, DOESN'T TRUMP MY FREEDOM TO CALL IT WHAT IT IS! You talk about it as if the troops only died to protect her striptease, and not my right to be disgusted with her choice of location! Are you a lefty?
In any case, there ARE worse things to be upset about.
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 05, 2007 01:26 AM (2OHpj)
You wouldn't think that a sign like this would be necessary, but apparently it is. Apparently, there are those folks who would seriously consider using a memorial to our veterans as a swimming pool.
Now, like most red-blooded American males, I generally have no problem with a hot young girl frolicking around in a fountain in a white t-shirt. (In fact, I might even go so far as to say I'm generally in favor of that sort of thing.)
If the young lady splashing about in our National World War II Memorial in these pictures is American Idol's Antonella Barba, I'd say she has some explaining to do.
UPDATE : The original post gave the benefit of a little doubt as to whether it really was the memorial fountain in the pictures. As Good Lt. notes, there really isn't any doubt as to whether it is the memorial fountain, so I changed the post to reflect that.
UPDATE by Rusty: I've been to the WWII Memorial only once. I described it in this post:
Cried as I found my grandfather's name at the new WWII memorial.
Those tears, by the way, were shared with my mom, who I called as soon as I found her father's name. My mom never knew her father. He was killed fighting the Japanese when she was just a toddler.
The Japanese not only robbed my grandfather of his life, they robbed my mother and myself the chance to ever get to know him.
Just thought I'd throw that in there. I am someone who has little problem blaspheming that which is held as sacred, but which isn't. But if there is such a thing as a place that is sacred, then the WWII Memorial surely is one of those places. The blood of my grandfather, if it is worth anything, has made it so.
1
She's positively drop-dead gorgeous, I'll give her that.
But that is indeed the National WWII memorial, and she does need to explain herself.
It isn't the local shoppingmall fountain.
Posted by: Good Lt at February 28, 2007 01:17 PM (D0TMh)
2
Disgusting, no matter who it is. I like the cheesecake as much as any red-blooded hetero male, but there are limits to taste, and that has less to do with the amount of clothes on than the setting.
Posted by: TXEric at February 28, 2007 01:18 PM (0+Yl+)
Stripping and doing a wet-tshirt photo shoot on a war memorial is "honoring" it? Despite the fact that she blatantly ignored the signs, doesn't doing a spread on the official memorial of our grandparents irk you a bit?
What if your family members were among the honored ?
Posted by: Good Lt at February 28, 2007 04:30 PM (D0TMh)
7
Just wait until you see the ones where she has the Washington memorial in her mouth!
This chick looks good in some pics, but has way too much upper gum line and toothiness. Plus, she let herself get photographed chomping on some guy with a small d. That's just pathetic.
Posted by: wooga at February 28, 2007 04:50 PM (t9sT5)
"Uncovered" meathead! What an idiot! I bet she didn't even think about it much. A worthwhile use of cheescake to draw traffic yet make a point! Well done on Ragnar's part. USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 28, 2007 05:16 PM (2OHpj)
9
Good Lt., that WWII memorial aint to Grandparents, it's to Grandpas. The boys. If they young men that died for our freedom were to see her there, I don't think they would care a bit about whatever thing it is that you are unhappy with.
Posted by: QC at February 28, 2007 05:27 PM (PX+vn)
10
Oh, and "blatantly ignored signs"... kinda silly. I ignore signs all day long every day. Screw the signs. (Maybe she will in her next photos?)
Posted by: QC at February 28, 2007 05:29 PM (PX+vn)
11
Ahem, excuse me, but there is about a 99.9% chance that the girl had nothing to do with the decision to shoot there. In fact, she may never have even seen the sign.
As an artist who works with photographers on press kits from time to time (An old, ugly, male artist, though: She is indeed cute as all get out), I can tell you from first hand experience that the photographer and manager make virtually all of the location decisions. THEY are the ones with some explaining to do, as this causes BAD PUBLICITY for their client (But then, the old "There is no such thing as BAD publicity" axiom may have come into play here; the manager may have done this purposefully hoping for just this sort of outcome).
Posted by: Hucbald at February 28, 2007 06:22 PM (Nxezv)
12
As far I am concerned she can do what ever she wants in a wet t-shirt, where ever she wants to. The rest of you are not real men.
Posted by: Robert at February 28, 2007 10:36 PM (kuCYZ)
13
Yeah, sure Robert .... She can be the Whore of babylon as long as she looks hot! I'm sure you didn't mean that the way it came across. Once upon a time Jane Fonda was as hot as molten steel. That was, and still is no excuse for the things she did against our country, and our troops. This girl Antonella, is probably more a fool than a traitor, but we can still criticize her lack of care at what is suppossed to be a memorial. But feel free to defend her, if you think that is the honorable position to take ...
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 01, 2007 02:41 AM (2OHpj)
14
I will agree with QC that boys being boys, if the ghosts of those troops can see her, they probably don't mind. But to the families it's like having someone do a striptease on your Grandfathers gravestone. Tacky, and disrespectful. Kids don't think!
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 01, 2007 02:45 AM (2OHpj)
15
A cheap whore promoting herself shamelessly by dishonoring a National Monument. A monument built for present and future generations to honor WWII vets--not for dumb pigs from an ectremely crappy TV show.
Yes, I wrote "extremely crappy." I sneer at anyone dorky enough to watch it.
She's not even very hot. She has a chipmunk overbite and narrow boy-hips. Attractive, but nothing special.
I guess any narcissistic tramp from "American Idol" should be able to piss off whomever she wants. After all, she's "famous" (trying to be anyway,) and fame trumps all else. You're nothing unless you're famous. Being on TV makes you a better person.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at March 01, 2007 09:57 PM (Dt3sl)
I guess any narcissistic tramp from "American Idol" should be able to piss off whomever she wants.
Considering that the entire reason that this memorial exists is that American men of staggering courage and valor gave their lives to ensure that Americans like Antonella Barba would live in a nation where freedom and democracy existed and would ensure her right to do things and express opinions that you and I might disagree with. So the answer would indisputably be Yes, since that is precisely why the memorial exists in the first place.
Sorry Ragnar the memorial doesn’t exist because your grandfather shed his blood, it exist to remind us of how much your grandfather valued freedom. Antonella Barba’s actions in that fountain are in fact exactly the freedoms your grandfather valued so much that he laid down his life to protect. Your disgust at her actions are far more dishonoring to the memorial which exists to remind future generation of the price we have paid and the value we as a nation place on freedom then her frolicking in a fountain could ever do.
"Considering that the entire reason that this memorial exists is that American men of staggering courage and valor gave their lives to ensure that Americans like Antonella Barba would live in a nation where freedom and democracy existed and would ensure her right to do things and express opinions that you and I might disagree with. So the answer would indisputably be Yes, since that is precisely why the memorial exists in the first place."
Wrong. The memorial was built to honor the men who fought in WWII, not what they fought for.
Spare me the laftard rhetoric. You should know better. Contempt for Barba isn't more heinous than her vainglorious self promotion at the expense of WWII veterans.
They died for their friends and country, not talentless pigs competing on America's gayest TV show.
America is not based on vicious self interest, and desecrating monuments is not patriotic.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at March 04, 2007 02:27 AM (Dt3sl)
The Move America Forward site has all the details on the coast-to-coast caravan tour coming up in March, culminating in a huge pro-troop rally in DC:
Move America Forward invites you to join us as we launch a national caravan from California (leaving on Thursday, March 8, 2007) to Washington, D.C. where we will join "The Gathering of Eagles" for a giant pro-troop rally on Saturday March 17, 2007.
My guess is you're a stupid, ignorant fuck, but I'll give you the benefit of a little doubt. Do you even know enough to know why your first question is almost completely irrelevant to the issue of how much petroleum gets burned on the trip from California to DC?
My guess is, you don't have the first damn clue. Why don't you go look it up and get back to us? Or stay ignorant. Suit yourself.
As to your second question, most of that middle-eastern oil the caravan will be burning will be converted into water and CO2. Was there some point you were trying to make, or do you just like the clicky sound your keyboard makes when you hit the keys? No, wait, I get it--you're trying to say I'm some kind of a HYPOCRITE because I would dare to promote a specific, one-week EVENT that uses a little oil (to support our troops and our long-term national security) while at the same time advocating that we significantly reduce the amount of oil we use in our day-to-day lives over the course of months and years (to improve our long-term national security).
If you think the above makes me some kind of hypocrite, and that those two positions are even remotely inconsistent, you really are a moron.
Obviously you've been wounded by my little taunt.
Rest assured that I think you will look cute in your little hybrid as you go cruising with Melanie Morgan riding shotgun. Maybe you should wheel through Nebraska and peel out for Vinnie.
As for why you rambled that most oil gets converted to water and CO2, I can only guess that you must have had your head up a tailpipe inhaling carbon monoxide. Perhaps in that case, at least for a cerebral Euro-dude, like yourself, carbon monoxide is more toxic than your own eco-babble.
Posted by: Hybrid Fetish at February 22, 2007 02:56 PM (YLJck)
4
Should be beter then HANOI JANES goofy peace bus
Posted by: sandpiper at February 22, 2007 04:10 PM (ciw10)
They'll be passing north of me at the I10-I20 fork in Tejas, so I might have to take my gas-guzzling RAM 1500 QuadCab 4x4 (With a Rancho lift kit, natch) up to "rah, rah" a bit.
My carbon footprint has only been Godzilla-like lately. Must do something about that.
Posted by: Hucbald at February 22, 2007 06:13 PM (w8csg)
A million more casualties on each side as she decided not to use the a-bomb.
Hell, given what Dick Morris says about her anti-Semitism, she probably would have tried to take the "higher road" of peace and cooperation with Hitler.
Fireside chats would have been "conversations".
Eleanor Roosevelt would have been called Bill and a philanderer and the newest Senator in New York.
We would have had social security and health security...
Jesus.
Posted by: Darth Vag at February 19, 2007 09:24 PM (b0FZu)
2
And she would of ordered a retreat after 30 mins of being on Iwo Jima.
Posted by: Randman at February 20, 2007 12:30 AM (Sal3J)
3
62 years ago. 9/11 was less than 7 yrs ago. What should have been our biggest wake up call is now a slumber as we wait for a bigger attack. One thing is consistent about Americans. They never learn. I guess we are to busy protecting the rights of those who don't give a damn about the rights of others.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 20, 2007 01:49 AM (PFUNQ)
4
My wife's grandfather was there, and if he had known then how things
would turn out with the scum of the earth running this country, he'd
probably have stayed on his farm instead of watching so many of his
friends die. This country has gone to hell and everything he and his
comrades in arms fought for has been forfeit by cowards and lefturds.
It's time for revolution.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 22, 2007 09:22 AM (eGb9y)
Posted by: Mike Sieber at February 17, 2007 09:22 AM (ugzBc)
8
No enjoys seeing terrorists or their democrat party allies eating the dust more than I, but its hard to tell what's actually going on in these videos, not to mention the fact that the cameras are moving around so spastically as to cause nausea. Maybe we can get a hollywood has-been like Baldwin or Sarandan to donate a good stabilized video camera.....
Posted by: L at February 17, 2007 11:52 AM (Gvo/q)
1
Uhhhh...excuse me. Why wasn't this done 3 years ago............? just askin'.
Posted by: n.a. palm at February 13, 2007 12:10 PM (ZK/Un)
2
Now why would Iraq need to close its borders with Syria and Iran? I thought that they had an interest in reducing the violence in Iraq. Perhaps someone can call James Baker - or better yet Robert Gates (another ISG'er) - for an explanation.
Posted by: Cruiser at February 13, 2007 12:44 PM (7PR+I)
3
We are the most powerful country on Earth apparently and we can't secure our borders - it is not possible. Anyone telling you differently probably wants to sell you more prisons too (psst, those don't work too well either but they sure cost a lot of tax money and kickbacks just like giant security borders). Borders are ineffectual against determined individuals, they couldn't keep in the East Germans or Russians who defected - check the history of any wall (or security border) ever built and you will witness an expensive exercise in futility.
Posted by: tbone at February 13, 2007 06:21 PM (HGqHt)
America used to protect its national integrity quite effectively. Wetbacks were routinely rounded up and thrown out. There were not millions of illegals entering the country every year in the 70s, or even the 80s--which is when the mass amnesties and enticement programs began in earnest.
In the 30s, 40s and 50s, the LAPD used to take them out to the Arizona desert and dump them far from the Mexican or California border--with a promise of ass kickings if they snuck back.
The authorities have the means to round up virtually every wetback in the country, they just don't have the will or the government mandate.
The border jumpers coming to Iraq are just there to do the jobs that ordinary Iraqis wont do, like head chopping, suicide bombing, torturing civilians, etc. We should encourage them to come help the Iraqi economy.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 13, 2007 07:39 PM (Dt3sl)
5
Tbone: You watermelon eating prick. What do you mean we? Friggin commie.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 18, 2007 06:41 PM (v+LdF)
VICTORYCAUCUS.COM
N.Z. Bear, of TRUTHLAIDBEAR.COM, has a new project. Details here:
Where should you start? Well, first, take a look at our Mission and Beliefs. They start with this fundamental statement:
We support victory in the war against radical Islamists. We supported the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and we believe victory is necessary in both countries for America's self-defense.
If that sounds right to you, then join us: register an account here , and let us know as much (or as little) as you care to share about yourself with your fellow Caucus members. One of the main goals of this effort is to show our leaders that there is a broad and influential community of citizens (and voters --- and donors) who believe victory is necessary. So the more info you can share with us, the more credibly we can convey that message --- but it's entirely up to you how much you'd like to share.
1
8 SIMPLE RULES HE WHO HATES will himself become hated. He who loves hate destroys his own soul. He who wishes death on others invites his own death. He who fights peace will have no peace. He who lives in hate will die in hate. He who dies in hate will pour his own blood into the sand, no trace of it to be revered by those who knew him. He who is without caring will live amongst those without caring. He who will not love will not be loved.
Posted by: DemocracyRules at February 12, 2007 06:35 PM (th0SY)
2
Chimpys plan for an Orwellian police state is going to fail miserably.Why?Take a look at the Iraq war,a complete failure.Also,it will take millions of
people working day and night to keep tabs on everyone,how are they going to do it?
Posted by: don at February 12, 2007 06:42 PM (PNdsP)
3
democracyrules: Here's another one. He who gets his head cut off is stupid.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 13, 2007 07:58 AM (S6UZQ)
Unhinged BDS is no substitute for a coherent comment.
That buzzing you hear in your ears is caused by the Haliburton monitoring chip implanted in your skull. Agents of B.U.S.H. (Bush Undercover Spy Headquarters) are on their way to pick you up right now.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 13, 2007 06:58 PM (Dt3sl)
5
TO: don..... Maybe you missed my point. I have no problem with waging war when it is necessary, and I certainly do not intend to present my neck in some vain effort to pursue peace. The downfall of Islamists is that they are addicted to hate, and by violating the '8 simple rules' they participate in their own destruction. The allies will win most easily if we do not let ourselves descend into hate... just kill 'em fair and square. OK?
Posted by: DemocracyRules at February 16, 2007 06:53 PM (th0SY)
Interview with Gina Elise of Pin Ups for Vets
If you've never heard of Gina Elise and her project Pin Ups for Vets prepare to become very informed and amazed. Gina Elise is a 24-year-old who majored in theater at UCLA. It's not often that someone of Gina's age gets interested in helping people. It's even less often that someone from the state of California actively supports veterans and our troops like she does. Gina Elise is not your ordinary California girl, college graduate and with her Pin Ups for Vets calendars, specifically designed for troops and veterans, she is supporting the troops overseas, downrange, and veterans recovering here at home.
A year ago Gina Elise decided to take her, "love for retro and do something to help injured soldiers at the same time." Gina told me that the inspiration for Pin Ups for Vets is, "The stories I hear about injured soldiers returning home from overseas really has a huge effect on me. Their lives have changed forever because of these injuries --- because they served our country. The motivation and energy they have is inspiring to me. I want to do something for them."
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Baghdad's streets were electric with tension Wednesday as U.S. officials confirmed the new security operation was under way. U.S. armor rushed through streets, and Iraqi armored personnel carriers guarded bridges and major intersections.
Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 08, 2007 03:11 AM (2OHpj)
5
Won't work you know. As long as we use troops as police that will figure a way to kill. The day to day interaction between Iraqs should be done by Iraqs.Our troops should be engaged in military actions. When entire neighborhoods or groups need to be taken out we should go in and take them out then get out to our camps. Secure camps without a single Iraqi allowed in. Leaving our troops on street corners and our helicopters hovering over them is nothing but target practice for the muslimes. WE CARE TO MUCH ABOUT THEM. They obviously don't care about each other so why should we. SPEAK THEY'RE OWN LANGUAGE. BOOM!
Posted by: greyrooster at February 08, 2007 08:05 AM (0W1Sk)
6
Hey the cops are back in town. Iraqis preys have been listened, more targets, hurray! Please don´t send just 21500 more, send all of them, the more the merrier.
Posted by: VC at February 08, 2007 08:34 AM (Azycp)
Your islamopithecine prayers have been ignored. The Americans are killing your brethren like dogs as I write this. You know what? There's not a damn thing you can do about it.
Where is Allass? ("allah.") Why cant he help you? The American military is more powerful than your fake moon god.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 08, 2007 09:46 AM (Dt3sl)
Why even respond to Jake when he is obviously only making himself look like an ass?
He doesn't even realize that his crude attempt to trump the remark aimed at Allah should offend muslims as well. After all, they DO claim Jesus as a prophet.
Jake must be totally lacking in any comprehension of comparative religion.
His attempt at debate reminds me of a BLT, without the B, the L, or the T. Disappointing really ....
Pity him ...
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 09, 2007 12:29 PM (2OHpj)
12
Finally, the real war starts! Yahoo! Why are we killing Iraqi's again?
Posted by: tbone at February 09, 2007 01:19 PM (HGqHt)
13
Somebody wake tbone up, he's been sleeping the last twenty years, and has missed everything. USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 09, 2007 01:49 PM (2OHpj)
14
He isn't even informed enough to ask a legitimate question. I mean honestly ... "why are we helping Iraqi's" would have been a much better question! Next I expect him to ask what happened to the 'Iron Curtain'. USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at February 09, 2007 01:54 PM (2OHpj)
England is an inbred nation of rotten toothed faggots. You all take it up the ass from islamopithecines--except for your women. They take it up the ass from anything that moves.
Islamopithecines take it up the ass from pigs--except the women. They prefer american cock.
Atheists take it up the ass from any animal stronger than them--which includes squirrels and turtle doves.
Now what, bitch?
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 09, 2007 04:16 PM (Dt3sl)
The current state of U.S.-Libyan relations belies Washington’s rhetoric. State Department diplomats may claim victory, but engagement with Qadhafi has failed. The Libyan model has done nothing to rein in rogue states like Iran and Syria. Today, Iran grows defiant with its nuclear program, and Syria continues to support terrorism. The Libya model has been a boon for Qadhafi, but it has been a curse for the U.S. By laundering Qadhafi’s image, the U.S. has undercut its credibility. Dictators are emboldened. For the right price, they believe Washington will excuse their transgressions and ratchet down pressure.
Okay, it's obvious that the author's view is skewed in regards to the plight of his brother.
Getting Khaddafi (or however you want to spell it) to hand over his WMDs was a major victory for our nation's interests. Freeing this guy from jail? Not so much.
However, the premise remains sound. What really would have been in our nation's best interest would have been to get Khaddaffy to hand himself over along with his WMDs.
After all, the man has proved in the past, with his support of terrorism, to be himself a WMD.
When the left crows about the failure to find WMDs in Iraq, we properly respond that Saddam himself was one. Khadaffy shouldn't be any different.
more...
The Democrats on this committee and in the Senate condemn the plan that Petraeus put together. They're willing to vote (in a nonbinding way, of course) to voice their disapproval of this plan. But they're approving the guy who devised the plan and is going to head on over there to put it in action. And they wish him Godspeed as they do so. If they're so against this plan, why approve the guy who developed it and wants to implement it?
Stop asking questions of Democrats, ladies. Its unpatriotic.
1
I don't think it's unpatriotic to ask questions of the Democrats, just unproductive. Unless of course you love to sit and listen to doublespeak !!
Posted by: memphis761 at January 26, 2007 02:51 PM (2cR/Y)
2Meet the new boss.
Let's hope it's not a case of:
Meet the new boss, Same as the Old Boss
Posted by: davec at January 26, 2007 04:09 PM (yaQM4)
3
The General should now go and publicly tell them to shut up in that they are hurting the war effort. And he should do it every time the press sticks a camera in his face.
Posted by: Fred Fry at January 26, 2007 09:34 PM (hLi8T)
4
I don't understand. We are going to turn the heat up on the Iranians in Iraq. Therefore we tell them first? Doesn't make sense to me. I say kill the bastards and we wouldn't need to tell them. This first new policy is a poor one. Not impressed with him or Bush on this one.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 26, 2007 11:41 PM (w+w6p)
5If they're so against this plan, why approve the guy who developed it and wants to implement it?
Naive question. Because no politican wants to set themsleves up to be labled an obstructionist by the administration. The symbolic votes against the surge on both sides of the aisle--Democrats and RINOs as you would call them--is an age-old political strategy aimed at having your cake and eating it too. It says more about being a politician than being a Democrat.
Posted by: Gleep! at January 29, 2007 02:23 PM (Zlbra)
Places To Go (Update, bump)
It will be interesting to see how successful this is:
Area drivers will soon be able to fill up with gasoline made from "terror-free oil."
A gas station about to open near 129th and Q streets is named Terror Free Oil, and the idea is to offer consumers petroleum products from countries that do not sponsor terror.
Not wanting to be duped into driving far out of my way to get guilt-free gas, I checked the website for these people to see just who they consider to be "terror-free." I was thinking, of course, of Venezuela. Fortunately, Citgo is listed on the bad side.
I'll definitely be paying them a visit once they open.
Update: Fellow Nebrasktonian Angela is running a blog carnival on the subject.
1
We don't have a Sinclair in town anymore, and the closest Flying J that I know of is about 250 miles from here. That kinda sucks
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 22, 2007 12:44 PM (2OHpj)
2
If Bush had a ball sack he would have back when gas was 3+ a gallon and the pansies were screaming how the economy didn' t grow "enough" jobs, he would have stood up made a presidential order decree whatever opening Anwar & the Gulf of Mexico to full alt oil drilling.
Immediate result would have been drop in prices by OPEC to try to get US to change our mind on replacing thier as*es and thousands upon thousands of short term and long term jobs added to drill then run support the rigs. Not to mention in the long run Billions of extra dollars added to OUR ECONOMY not the foreigners.
As a bone to the pansies maybe they could have estimated the price saving in the gulf oil due to not having to ship it and drop that on the Gulf Rigs as a Eco tax. Or my preference just watch the OPEC scwirm to compete.
Posted by: C-Low at January 22, 2007 03:14 PM (vUi7y)
3
Yep! When Bush caused Katrina which destroyed oil production in the Gulf and had 500,000 people running generators for electricity and driving 100 miles for food and more fuel he should have done just that. Fuck with the little bit we could get. Dirty old Bush. We need a lefturd president because they never cause hurrincanes.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 22, 2007 07:17 PM (w+w6p)
4
Sinclair doesn't buy oil from wogs, so that's where I go now. The Terrorr free station isn't very close to my house, but I'll get there when I can.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at January 23, 2007 12:16 AM (abVz3)
Ethiopians Continue Domination of Islamist Savages
- Subtitle: Cleaning Up Clinton's Foreign Policy Legacy in Mogodishu-
The antidote to the Iraq Surrender Group's "strategem." That is, victory over a legion of the Islamic psychobrigades of the world through uncompromising ass-stomping. Bill Roggio highlights:
Nine days after the onset of open warfare between the al-Qaeda backed Islamic Courts and the Ethiopian backed Transitional Federal Government, the Islamic Courts have surrendered. "After having crucial and urgent meeting tonight in the capital, the leaders of executive and Shura councils of Islamic Courts Union and deputy leader of executive council of ICU, Sheik Hassan Dahir Aweys, Sheik Sharif Sheik Ahmed and Sheik Abdirahman Janaqow resigned and issued a joint press statement over the current situation in Somalia particular in Mogadishu," reports SomaliNet
The only problem? They're looking for a "quick out," and Islamists are well-known for burrowing into the woodwork and waiting their enemies (everyone) out.
1
I'm concerned over the description that the Sheik's "resigned." Resigned =/ surrendered.
The best way to prevent an insurgency is when the leader of the defeated nation issues a formal surrender and directs his followers to lay down arms. Think WW2 Japan.
Of course, even with a formal surrender, you'll still have a problem with foreign jihadists stirring up trouble, but at least a surrender dampens the local population's excitement for helping out the foreign jihadists.
Posted by: wooga at December 28, 2006 05:10 PM (t9sT5)
2
Hopefully the Ethiopians and the "transitional government" will push on and exterminate the "court" leaders.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 28, 2006 08:36 PM (abVz3)
3
ICU has taken a major hit, even if they try an insurgency. They are losing face. Lets hope they don't find a way to get it back again.
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 28, 2006 09:12 PM (2OHpj)
4
Seems like Somali warriors are a lot tougher on the internet than in person. Cowardly, monkeys. How dare to stand up and that like real men.
Posted by: Greyrooster at December 30, 2006 08:18 AM (XXvse)
I'm having one of those things where I'm pretty sure I read or heard of a rumor or a report that U.S. military commanders were, ah, emphatically advising the President that it was time for Mookie to go. I just can't remember where.
The article seems to suggest that he may have gotten the message.
But, the most interesting thing I found lay way at the bottom...
"For example, the Sunni party wants all checkpoints leading to and from Baghdad to have an equal number of Shiite and Sunni guards, he said.
Ah...the best way to make sure Iraq never threatens anyone again. From Affirmative Action to zoning laws, emasculate them with Liberalism.
Like...banning religious symbols on public property.
1
Yep, it's time for the Iraqis to learn that democracy means we need a president that we want for them, not the one they elected. Sure worked in Iran.
Posted by: Joe at December 21, 2006 12:20 AM (5zxY/)
2
"Why is this man not playing pinochle with Zarqawi in Hell?"
I'm sure pinochle offends the Jihadists down there. That would be my guess if you asked the question AFTER 'Mookie' was dead.
US, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 21, 2006 02:23 AM (2OHpj)
3
TYPO!!!
Sorry guys, I'm only a human being after all
USA, all the way!
Don't ever let me get away with not saying it!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 21, 2006 03:27 AM (2OHpj)
WASHINGTON - Though Americans are increasingly pessimistic about the war in
Iraq, the
Pentagon said Tuesday it is having success enlisting new troops. The Navy and Air Force met their recruiting goals last month while the Army and Marine Corps exceeded theirs, the Defense Department announced.
Yes, yes. Americans are so pessimistic about the war in Iraq that the military is having no problem meeting its recruiting goals.
Well, on the other hand, I'm guessing that the 'ol AP doesn't consider people who enlist in the armed forces as real Americans.
1
Just out of curiosity, why did this guy bozo want to instate a draft in the first place? Is he acknowledging that there might be a "dark storm brewing on the horizon" and trying to make sure that we're all ready for it, or is this some bizarre political point he's trying to make?
And then I read this quote...
"There's no question in my mind that this president and this
administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy
evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft
and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids
from their communities would be placed in harm's way."
Perhaps rather than going about reinstating the draft, something that would be very costly both in terms of money and effectiveness of the armed forces, he could go about starting some kind of special education program to improve the judgement of his fellow Congresspersons (is that what they call them these days? sorry, I'm an ignorant foreigner here
) so that they don't vote to go to war based on "flimsy evidence" before voting against it or whatever it is these idiots do.
Posted by: CanForce 101 at December 12, 2006 07:39 PM (xfvyZ)
2
Oh yea, America is sooooooo beaten that two young guys i work with, both 19 years of age, signed up, one for the Army, while the other enlisted for the USMC. Oh yea, liberal fools, we need a draft because only idiots join the armed forces.
God help me but i hate the Liberals in this world.
Posted by: THANOS at December 12, 2006 07:59 PM (rJBMR)
3
First off, Rangel is a dipstick. Second, there are more congressional offspring in the military, percentagewise, than the population as a whole. Third, The military likes volunteers, who WANT to be there, than draftees, who are there under threat of (1) lost college financial aid, (2) prison. Also, volunteers learn faster IMHO. Lastly, the education level of today's military beats the general population, also.
Doea this make me a biased, right wing, facist pig?
Posted by: codekeyguy at December 12, 2006 08:35 PM (+WuRB)
4
The left wants to reinstitute the draft because they want another Vietnam War. The draft was the only reason the leftistas managed to sway the general public to their side in that conflict. No other issue could have done it. They want to abandon Iraq and the entire Bush doctrine, and they see the draft as a means to do so. The Vietnam era was their coming out party, and they want to recreate their glory days.
Everybody knows this, But the leftistas think most Americans are too stupid to see through their ploy. They fancy themselves as an intellectual elite, despite all evidence to the contrary. They're just too stupid to know their limitations.
The AP would love to report on draft dodger rallies and leftie kids killed for Uncle Sam. They probably already have their stories written, just in case. They could use the Vietnam era stories just by changing the names and dates. Fucking dreamers.
AP stringers should be considered legitimate targets for the Coalition.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 12, 2006 08:46 PM (bLPT+)
5
The reason the Army has met its recruting goals is they have lowered some requirements and raised the age of enlistment to 42. Hundreds of recruits who would have been rejected in the past can now enlist.
Pentagon's data shows the military is leaning heavily on economically depressed rural areas for recruiting.
The top twenty counties for best recruiting haad lower than average national median income. higher poverty rates and 16 of the twenty were fro on metropolitan areas.
More than 44% of recruits come from rural areas where financially strapped, lower middle class to poor parents need to support such choices.
Of course, why not? Rich kids need to go to college so they can take over daddy's business. It's quite convenient that we have the rural rednecks out there fighting for out right to drive our Mercedes to class.
Rangel must be all wrong. A draft would just have these spoiled little rich kids messing everything up. Keep them home warm and snug. We've got plenty of kids willing to die for Wall Street.
And Thanos, your friends, just 19 years old ...you want me to believe that they have a full comprehension of exactly what is going on in Iraq and Afghanistan? How they have been given a legitimate and comprehensive sense of the "real" versus the trumped up Bush version of he "mission? and that their version is perfectly aligned with the "mission" of freeing people who are bombing their fellow soldiers.
You want me to believe that? Are they going over there to free the Arabs? For the Arabs to do what to us?
Posted by: civilbehavior at December 12, 2006 09:25 PM (AYJPk)
6
Jeff is 100% correct. When the draft was abolished at the tail end of the Viet Nam war, all the street protests mysteriously stopped. Gee, I wonder why. It wasn't the war they hated, it was the idea of being sent to Vietnam that made them anti-war. Dems figure the draft will get us out of Iraq quicker-- i.e., surrender (like it did Vietnam), and prevent any military engagement against Iran.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 13, 2006 12:38 AM (8e/V4)
Nice display of the leftist two-step. You dodged the truth about the leftista draft movement like Rangell dodges his White heritage and bottomless amorality.
42 year olds are enlisting in the Army now, and you cite that as proof of American opposition to killing terrorists in the Middle East? If you're going to make a monumentally stupid statement, go for the gold, moonbat.
The educational level in rural areas is far higher than the educational levels in urban areas. Despite your obvious distortions, military recruits are still better educated and come from more affluent families than your average city slickers/inbreds. Leftists score even lower on the success scale, but you're living proof of that, aren't you?
Maybe the AP can educate all those ignorant recruits who don't understand why they're going to Iraq. And maybe you can pull your head out of your ass and see what the world looks (and smells) like.
Being a leftist means never having to live up to your deficiencies, no matter how many times they're pointed out.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 13, 2006 01:27 AM (bLPT+)
Posted by: greyrooster at December 13, 2006 09:38 AM (jaYa7)
9Hundreds of recruits who would have been rejected in the past can now enlist.
Wow, I'm sure hundreds of recruites who would have been rejected in the past but can now enlist made all the difference. Civil, your logic is impaired by a mental disorder. It's called Liberalism.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 13, 2006 11:40 AM (8e/V4)
10
Jeff personal attacks in a debate usually indicate a lack of a convincing argument. Jeff could you provide a link for your statement "rural education levels are far higher than the education levels in urban areas...". The only ones I was able to find were more class related than a function of geography i.e. the richer states had better educational systems than the poorer states. The states with the highest incomes clustered in the northeast, all had the best test scores. You might want to take a look at the data provided by the US government cencus factfinder. http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html?_lang=en My zip 10025 105th street west side Manhattan NYC showed 58% as having at least a college degree. Could you tell me your zip ? I'd like to compare. Things are not going well in Iraq or in Afghanistan.
Posted by: John Ryan at December 13, 2006 12:39 PM (TcoRJ)
I'm struck by how poor your zip code is despite all it's college degrees. My zip (78006) has less college degrees than your Manhattan zip, yet our poverty levels are almost half of yours. Is it true that 9 out of 10 Phds in New York are waiting tables?
Posted by: dcb at December 13, 2006 01:09 PM (8e/V4)
12
Note my zip is a RURAL zip. We're all just a bunch of hick bumpkins according to the likes of John Ryan. Yet our poverty rates here are well below the national average, while Manhattan's are well above the national average. So much for getting a college edumacation.
Posted by: dcb at December 13, 2006 01:16 PM (8e/V4)
13
Well Jeff yes my neighborhood is diversified. Our poverty rate is 15% vs the nation wide rate 0f 12 % but our income is about 20% higher. Jeff I also did note that county had a somewhat abnormal rate of population of Black Americans that rate being 0.4% Is this true ? Is that ummm legal ? Is this one of those counties where Blacks are run out when sundown falls? As for the PHDs waiting on tables no doubt some are, but if they are they are probably taking in 500 dollars a night. But to get back to the educational levels of rural vs urban. Here is another link from the US government showing that they are NOT as high. http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/LaborAndEducation/ruraleducation/ In general Jeff the poor and the working class are leaving the cities. They can no longer afford to live here.
Posted by: John Ryan at December 13, 2006 01:42 PM (TcoRJ)
14Is this one of those counties where Blacks are run out when sundown falls?
Given that our Sherriff is black, somehow I doubt that. Don't really know why blacks don't live here. Probably because most blacks stick to the urban areas? Yet I've found that the few blacks who do live around here are well-to-do, have good jobs, with nice cars and homes. They don't speak jive either. Oh, and I'm not Jeff. I'm Jesusland Carlos. I change my nic sometimes cause I don't want to look like a serial commenter. Silly, I know.
Posted by: dcb at December 13, 2006 02:03 PM (8e/V4)
Posted by: dcb at December 13, 2006 02:10 PM (8e/V4)
16my neighborhood is diversified. Our poverty rate is 15% vs the nation wide rate 0f 12 % but our income is about 20% higher.
So your very Liberal zip code can boast of possibly the highest disparity of income levels on the planet. Gee, I guess congratulations are in order? Don't forget, diversity is strength!
Posted by: dcb at December 13, 2006 02:36 PM (8e/V4)
Here at basic training land for the 3rd year in a row, the inital entry trainees (IET) are better educated and come from a broad range of socio-economic backgrounds but what is surprising is that the army had a outside study done and it found that the army recruits come from a higher than average background than mainstream america. I can find you the exact source if any one wants, it was also published in the army times last spring.
In the interest of time and space here I could also talk about the so called lower standards for recruits too, but will leave that for another time or just email me if you want.
Posted by: DAT at December 13, 2006 04:47 PM (MOHqt)
Why am I not surprised that you try to make your case by....lyin.' Like all aspiring elitists, you try to claim the ideological retards on the left (Homo Flaccidus,) are more intelligent and better educated than real people (Homo Sapiens). You blame the unavoidable reality of disparate educational achievment on class warfare and racism, as all commie automatons do.
The truth is that leftists are stupid. That's why they inhabit a fantasy world where the crackpot theories of a failed, unemployed economist provide the blueprint for Utopia.
Like all leftists, you regurgitated someone else's stale old argument instead of developing your own. In this case, you plagiarized the New York Times' drivel about educational levels. Drivel that has been refuted over and over since the day it was first disseminated. Canards don't win arguments, dumb-fuck.
Your bogus links were a nice touch, in an underhanded, disingenuous, queer-bait sort of way. Unfortunately, the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES,) puts the lie to your claims. So does a quick Google search.
The NCES shows that primmary school students from Small cities and rural communities have far higher standardized test scores than big city mutants. (Despite the fact that big cities routinely cook the books regarding student performance.) Most college students come from smaller cities and rural communities, not that a college education indoctrination is anything to brag about these days.
Big cities have a large proportion of college students because--wonder of wonders--most colleges are located in large communities. Big cities attract a lot of college grads because--wonder of wonders--that's were most of the jobs are.
It's hilarious that you stole the NYT conceit about Manhattan being the center of the intellectual universe,becausevirtually nobody who lives there was born there. The majority of America-last, apple martini swilling leftistas in Madhattin come from--you guessed it--smaller cities and communities.
Just for the record: You don't live in Manhattan, and most waiters there live below the poverty level.
Fuck, but you're stupid.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 13, 2006 10:24 PM (bLPT+)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The independent panel studying U.S. policy in
Iraq has unanimously agreed to a report that will call for a gradual pullback of American combat troops in Iraq but stops short of setting a firm timetable for withdrawal, The New York Times reported on Wednesday.
I apologize in advance for this analysis.
EXCUSE ME, BUT ISN'T THIS WHAT EVERY G-D C-Sing M-Fing PUNDIT FROM #12404849 IN THE ECOSYSTEM TO BUSH HIMSELF HAS BEEN SAYING FOR THE LAST THREE AND A HALF FRICKIN' YEARS???????????????
Once again, my apologies. More intellectual analysis below the fold.
more...
1
Greg (a Black conservative) and Greyrooster are having gay sex right now in Guerneville.
Posted by: Speaking for the Choir at November 30, 2006 01:02 AM (HSkSw)
2
Looks like Bush was right all along. Stay the course.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 30, 2006 01:21 AM (yJKSD)
3
True. The lefturds will offer nothing new. As I said before demos don't make policy. They only complain about the policies of their betters. Think President Bush made errors? Envision Nancy Pelosi or Alcee Hastings running the show.
Posted by: Greyrooster at November 30, 2006 07:43 AM (0TutP)
4
Well it is true that for the last 6 years the Democrats have not made policy. For the next 2 years they will also be quite limited as the Constitution of these United States gives limited power to the legislative branch in foreign policy. The Baker-Hamillton report seems to say that the pull back should begin, without being determined by actual conditions on the ground in Iraq. This differs from what the present administration has been saying. They have been saying "victory" is he only option.
Posted by: John Ryan at November 30, 2006 10:16 AM (TcoRJ)
5They have been saying "victory" is he only option.
And the Dems are saying it isn't. So why anybody voted for them is a complete mystery to me.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 30, 2006 11:00 AM (yJKSD)
6
John Ryan: You wouldn't understand why victory is the only option. Those like you always upset the apple cart and then die under the flood of apples. The rest of us never get to say I told you so. Because you're dead.
Posted by: Greyrooster at November 30, 2006 05:45 PM (0TutP)
It really helps to get your point across and to have people take you seriously.
Posted by: PuddleDuck at December 01, 2006 06:26 AM (eLvC2)
8
Yeah, victory was the only option in Vietnam, too.
It was a Republican president that cut and ran in Beiruit and a Republican president that cut and ran in Vietnam (at least Nixon did the right thing, as there was no way that we were going to win that war, that Johnson, fraudulently got us into).
President Moron is going to leave it to the next president to "win" the war in Iraq, since he knows he isn't going to do it.
He made the mess but someone else will have to clean it up.
Maybe he could just send in 500,000 soldiers into Iraq and end the fighting, once and for all.
But to get another 500,000 soldiers into Iraq, they would have to be drafted, since the military can't meet the recruiting goals, they have now, even with the lowered standards.
If victory in Iraq is the goal, then President Moron needs to wage a real war, using the honest advice of his commanders, and stop requiring that they only tell him what he wants to hear.
The American people must make the sacrifices necessary to win the war.
Raise taxes, to pay for the war - starting with eliminating the tax cuts for the wealthy 2 percent.
Cut the subsidies for the oil companies and drug companies.
Stop all of the pork in congress. No more bridges to nowhere.
Start drafting the 500,000 men and women that are needed to "win" this war.
I hate to admit it but both John McCain and Charlie Rangel are right, and I don't really like either of the 2 SOBs.
If President Moron isn't willing to fight the war to win, then we need to just get the fuck out of there, so more Americans don't die, because of President Moron's failed Iraq policies.
Posted by: PuddleDuck at December 01, 2006 07:16 AM (uuZIF)
9
"Looks like Bush was right all along. Stay the course.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 30, 2006 01:21 AM"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA - Another moron backslapping fest?
"Stay the course" is the best plan that President Moron and Jim Baker can come up with?
Why not, It's been working sooooooo well, so far.
Posted by: PuddleDuck at December 01, 2006 07:24 AM (i93qu)
10
Piddledick: How about some more of your famous war stories. Tell us about the time you parachuted into Nepal. That should be a good one. Friggin phoney.
Posted by: Greyrooster at December 01, 2006 10:33 AM (uBw3u)
1
Notice the name of the Mohammedan author. You can tell he is objective by his title, "Somalia braces for war as residents flee." He seems to suggest that the Christian Ethiopian troops arriving are making Somalia "brace for war." Far from it.
Somalia has been one big Islamist death-porn scene ever since Islam arrived. The only way the followers of Mohammed are going to understand the futility of war, is to bring war to them on a scale we brought war to the militaristic Japanese people... the United States and its allies must start destroying entire cities with nuclear weapons.
Posted by: Speaking for the Choir at November 25, 2006 10:55 AM (HSkSw)
2
Even an idiot like speaking for the choir can get it right once in a while.
Posted by: Greyrooster at November 25, 2006 07:43 PM (VMUjK)
Enemy Of My Enemy And All That
A lengthy article from the Times (U.K.) shows a side of the conflict in Iraq you usually don't see outside CENTCOM press releases.
While the world’s attention has been focused on Baghdad’s slide into sectarian warfare, something remarkable has been happening in Ramadi, a city of 400,000 inhabitants that al-Qaeda and its Iraqi allies have controlled since mid-2004 and would like to make the capital of their cherished Islamic caliphate.
A power struggle has erupted: al-Qaeda’s reign of terror is being challenged. Sheikh Sittar and many of his fellow tribal leaders have cast their lot with the once-reviled US military. They are persuading hundreds of their followers to sign up for the previously defunct Iraqi police. American troops are moving into a city that was, until recently, a virtual no-go area. A battle is raging for the allegiance of Ramadi’s battered and terrified citizens and the outcome could have far-reaching consequences.
1
And I am sure that these new police will be really good police, not like the kind that use power drills on the Shia, or who attack ministries and drive off in police trucks with 150 hostages.
After these guys are armed and trained whose side are they going to be on ?
The side of the shia dominated government ?
The side of the occupation/liberators Inquiring minds want to know !
Optimistic thinking has so far put us in a very bad place in Iraq
Posted by: John Ryan at November 20, 2006 06:26 PM (TcoRJ)
2
You wouldn't know optimistic thinking if it crawled up your ass and died, you simpering shitnozzle.
Now piss off, before Rusty orders us, yet again, to give you The Treatment.
Posted by: Vinnie at November 20, 2006 08:57 PM (/qy9A)
I don't think its about optimism or depression...its about heart felt desire for American failure and defeat.
Posted by: Randman at November 20, 2006 09:08 PM (Sal3J)
5
After these guys are armed and trained whose side are they going to be on ?
Right now they're on our side. It's a start.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 20, 2006 09:16 PM (8e/V4)
6
Never mine me....just using the manual trackback mechanism....
Posted by: Scott at November 20, 2006 10:19 PM (Rr+Kb)
7
John Ryan you sissy. I challenge you to a duel to the death. I'll even pay for your transportation and burial expenses. Will mommy let you out of the house long enough for me to beat your ugly face to nothing?
Posted by: Greyrooster at November 21, 2006 05:12 AM (Mgy1K)
I’m Listening Part II suspect Pakistan may have killed or injured Ayman al-Zawahiri or critical elements responsible for his ability to communicate and release statements. Of course al-Qaeda’s response to the elections coming from the Iraqi wing of the organization may have been a strategic propaganda call, but it also may be designed to carry attention away from a huge loss.
Historically the trend has been what when a claim was made that Zawahiri was a target, or killed in an attack, that he acts quickly to refute these claims with an audio or video message.
It has not been 12 days since reports he was targeted on October 30th and nothing, nada, silence, zilch. He may very well be dead. And if you are not dead Mr. Zawahiri, you murdering, lying, piece of terrorist filth, Show me.
“Show Me!â€, ain’t a motto here in the US for nothing. Zawahiri’s statements sometimes follow al-Qaeda in Iraq’s by a few days but Mr. Zawahiri, if we don’t here from you very soon, I’m going to celebrate your death over a big pork chop and an ice cold beer.
George W Bush and all of America, left and right, are going to be able to start celebrating another victory in the war against al-Qeada, namely your rotting stinking corpse. You have failed miserably. We are still standing. You have failed to attack us. We are still fighting in Iraq. You, Mr. Zawahiri, are an utter failure.
more...
1"George W Bush and all of America, left and right, are going to be able to start celebrating..."
All of America plus all countries and peoples who stand with the U.S. against Zawahiri and his barbarous ilk.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at November 11, 2006 12:12 PM (1juA+)
2
These Mo-slime thugs think just because in areas where they have the upper hand they maitain control through murder and intimidation, that somehow the rest of world also must live in fear of them. F**k them!
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at November 11, 2006 12:16 PM (1juA+)
Posted by: Bagelblogger at November 11, 2006 01:00 PM (bdWlP)
5
I don't have much faith in the 'he hasn't released a video/tape so he's dead theory' at all, wasn't that what they said about Osama Bin Laden -- because he hadn't released a tape in 18 months he was dead, then he released one right before the 2004 elections. I'm pretty sure communication for those guys are severed, they're in the 'box' so to speak. It would be awesome if they were though.
Posted by: davec at November 11, 2006 01:24 PM (QkWqQ)
6
Old Aymen crossed the border into the US illegally and voted Democratic.
After this latest election, we can be sure that Aymen has been heard!
Posted by: Dill Doe at November 11, 2006 02:12 PM (m2Rfy)
Speaking of which perhaps we could show the Aussie Rape Mullah what happens with uncovered meat when we bag one of these. No cats. Just lots and lots of maggots. Set it up with a live webcam and lots of warm lights so it's viewable 24/7.
Playing nice, playing fair with this crowd makes them think we are weak.
Time to show them that we CAN play by their rules, we are just normally not as nasty.
Normally.
You ticked us off, though, so we'll start playing your way.
Posted by: GI Joe at November 11, 2006 06:15 PM (0euLV)
11
No, because than I would have shot him. Just because he hasn't released a video in a while doesn't mean he's dead. If he is killed than Al Qaeda would say "We bring you the joyous news of the martyrdom of Ayman Al-Zawahri" like in the case of Zarqawi. When he's dead, you'll know.
Posted by: George Ramos at November 11, 2006 06:55 PM (wkRws)
12
George, they had to do that with Zarqawi. We knew it before they did. There was no denying it We had the pics.
Posted by: Oyster at November 11, 2006 07:31 PM (YudAC)
13
He's either dead, wounded, or barely ahead of his pursuers. If he had been able, you can be assured he would have responded to the blue pill we took last Tuesday. He could not have resisted the opportunity.
I hope rather than believe the old goat to be dead, but something is wrong, or the bastard would have spoken. And he may yet. But something has prevented him so far. Let's hope our luck holds.
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 11, 2006 09:13 PM (8PoNP)
I hope he is dead but right now I need proof. Silence isn't enough in this case.
Posted by: George Ramos at November 12, 2006 09:32 AM (wkRws)
15
Nice post Howie. We need more like this to keep the morale up.
Posted by: SeeMonk at November 12, 2006 12:15 PM (n4VvM)
16
Gee thanks, I have my doubts he is dead. I expect if he is not we'll hear from him in less than seven days. I'm noting a bunch of Jihadi smugness and releases. Best of beheading vids with Zaqawi smiling from heaven. Time to give em hell.
Posted by: Howie at November 13, 2006 11:45 AM (D3+20)
I’m Listening Part II
I hereby challenge the newly elected Democrats to get off their duff and refute Al-Qaeda and Iran’s gloating over the election.
Iran believes they have won and the Democrats will allow them free reign oppress the people of Iran and export their influence into Lebanon and further deepen their interference in Iraq amongst the Shia in the south.
Al-Qaeda in Iraq believes that their campaign of terror has worked. That losing 3000 soldiers will drive us off the battlefield and we will abandon the people of Iraq. By the way the terrorists have murdered 150,000 Iraqi civilians. Yes 150,000 civilians. Will you allow the Iraqi people to again be ruled by those that murder them?
I don’t believe that is part of Liberalism. How can anyone be for freedom to the extent that they want murderors and terrorist oppressors to be free to destroy it?
Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, DICK Durbin, you now represent not only the people who voted for you but also those who did not. You now carry the burden of prosecuting the war. War powers lie with the congress. The President can only execute those powers given to him.
I don’t think a single voter voted for surrender to terrorists and terrorist supporting states. But the terrorists do.
I call on the new Democratic leadership to quickly rebut Iran and al-Qaeda in Iraq. Every minute that passes is another minute their perception of victory grows. Every minute you delay is a boost to their morale. I call on conservative and moderate Democrats to make sure they do.
Evan, Brad, Nancy, Harry, DICK?
Show me!
You must show me and show them too, and do it quickly. Wipe the smile from the enemy’s face.
1
Do the Iranians not know that it was the Dems that got us into Vietnam? If ever there was a quagmire to get into, Iran will be it. We'll take the mullahs so far down they won't be able to tell how many pegs they've been knocked down.
Posted by: Ernie Oporto at November 11, 2006 12:23 PM (WvUov)
2
Howie, Have you considered sending what you've just said here as a letter to Nancy P., Harry R., DICK D.?
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at November 11, 2006 12:28 PM (1juA+)
3
Gee Howie it may be a little late to explain that all of the rhetoric of the last election was just politics. We heard so often from the Republicans that a vote for the Democrats was a vote to surrender or to cut and run or that they were the defeatocrats, so much about treason and traitors that I guess it just has to encourage the bad guys. They are probably even expecting a civil war...... HERE!!
Posted by: John Ryan at November 11, 2006 02:24 PM (TcoRJ)
4We heard so often from the Republicans that a vote for the Democrats
was a vote to surrender or to cut and run or that they were the
defeatocrats
I know. Those silly repubs misconstruing the brave idea of immediate pullout or the deceptive
aggression of redeploying 5000 miles away in a brilliant ploy to lull
the terrorist into overconfidence as cut and run.
Posted by: Randman at November 11, 2006 04:21 PM (Sal3J)
5
Since I expect the Dems to start doing the wrong thing I hope they surprise me.
There was a Democrat in the White House when we smacked down Germany in WWI.
There was a Democrat in the White House when we smacked down Germany and Japan in WWII.
That's the kind of Democratic leadership we need.
Of course, if we'd had the kind of Republican in the White House that put the smackdown on our own "insurgents" in 1865 then I don't think Iran or North Korea would be so nasty.
Posted by: GI Joe at November 11, 2006 06:22 PM (0euLV)
6
Yep the Democrates won. Just think America got screwed big time. Hope not but we will see. All I want is for us to be honest and truthful in all that we do. Money isn't everything. Just want my grandkids to grow up in a peaceful world. Regardless, we are in a war and we need to win it no matter what it takes to do it. We are capable, just let the soldiers do their job they are trained for. God bless them on this Veterans Day
Posted by: Kay at November 11, 2006 11:00 PM (L5LRS)
7
"You now carry the burden of prosecuting the war."
I disagree. They carry the burden of funding the war. George W. Bush still carries the burden of prosecuting it. Give the Democrats credit for what power they did win, but let's not get carried away.
Taking that line of thought a level deeper, just how effective is their razor-thin majority in the senate where WoT legislation is concerned? I admit that I'm no scholar of the platforms that the red and purple state democrats ran on, but anyone can read a poll. The polls with regard to terrorist surveillance and immigration have been pretty unambiguous.
Posted by: Immolate at November 12, 2006 09:42 AM (qHyi8)
8Those silly repubs misconstruing the brave idea of immediate pullout or the deceptive
aggression of redeploying 5000 miles away in a brilliant ploy to lull
the terrorist into overconfidence as cut and run.
I was a little more concerned with those silly repubs who had little other to say that "let's keep doing what we're doing; it's working" when it is so obviously not. But they're gone now. Let's see what happens.
Posted by: Gleep! at November 12, 2006 10:15 AM (a7sMc)
RAMADI, IRAQ – Coalition Forces killed four terrorists and detained 48 suspected terrorists during a raid of a known al-Qaeda meeting place in Ramadi Tuesday afternoon.
During the raid, Coalition ground forces encountered two hostile men fleeing from the scene in a vehicle. Despite repeated requests to surrender, the two men continued to threaten Coalition Forces. Coalition Forces killed the two terrorists. Upon searching the terrorists’ vehicle, Coalition Forces discovered rocket-propelled grenades, machine guns, grenades and suicide vests.
Coalition Forces were later engaged outside nearby buildings and ground forces killed two more terrorists. During the raid a male civilian received a minor wound to the neck and Coalition Forces provided medical care on the scene.
1
Which makes me think they have suicide vests in abundance. Willing volunteers seem to be lacking. Mullahs need to ramp up their poisonspeak.
Posted by: REMF at November 09, 2006 02:15 AM (7RMSi)
2
I have a 21 year old nephew Marine in Anbar Province in Ramadi. We, of course, have to read everything regarding Ramadi. His poor mother and family are on pins and needles.
My nephew as already lost some friends and one night he was talking on a satellite phone with his mom and suddenly he dropped the phone and hit the ground with the sound of an explosion heard on the other end of the phone line. Moments later he picks up the phone and tells his mom that the mortar barely went over his head and exploded a short distance away.
Pretty rough in Ramadi and I wish we would stop fighting this war like Vietnam and use OVERWHELMING FORCE.
Therefore, I have mixed emotions on Rumsfield resignation. I don't know if he is the problem or our military generals are the incompetent ones for failure to ask for greater troop strength from day one.
Some of the retired military high up military echelon that I have seen on TV don't impress me much. It seems that many are just like their civil counterparts in government, i.e. a typical bureaucrat, who perhaps Kerry should have directed his stupid "joke" too.
Very few of our Generals and Admirals, if any, are like the Pattons and MacArthurs of the past. Such real courageous and INTELLIGENT military leaders are a rare find. Most are just bloated bureaucrats with medals for duration of service who probably don't know which end of a gun to use nor has never seen a war, but for perhaps the war of the forms.
General Casey in Iraq has not asked for more troops and Bush is relying on his assessment on the ground.
I think we need an assessment of General Casey.
I'm not for "cut and run" even though it would be very easy to support such Democratic faux-paus when you have a loved one in the center of the hellhole called Ramadi, particularly when the government civil and military leadership seem to lack the will to win.
Rather this Iraq war is like WWI. Each side in trenches with each side content to slowly kill each other off from day to day. To hell with that, the military and civillian leadership need to pull their Vietnam head out of their behinds and obliterated the enemy using all force, troop stength, and ruthlessness necessary to win.
Doing so without mercy. And by the way, it is an act of war for Syria and Iran to give military aid & comfort to the insurrgents for the very purpose to kill our men and women in uniform.
Iran and Syria need to be decimiated.
Happy now...got that off my chest.
Posted by: FLLaw33870 at November 09, 2006 04:02 AM (38GUY)
But...but...but, We would lose the "moral high ground"!!!/sarc off
Posted by: REMF at November 09, 2006 05:19 AM (7RMSi)
4
If the 40% turnout of eligible voters is correct then I'm beginning to feel that there is an awful lot of free loaders being protected by our troops. Too bad we can't come up with some method of encouragement for that other 60%. Like vote or fight.
Posted by: NortonPete at November 09, 2006 06:55 AM (fVuwW)
But then again, the media felt to put their standard line about More than 3,000 people have been killed, mostly militantsto make sure we still think things aren't going well.
Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at November 09, 2006 09:22 AM (oC8nQ)
6
Nationwide voter turnout has not yet been finalized but it was exceptionally high. I am guessing closer to 60% than to 40%
Posted by: John Ryan at November 09, 2006 02:45 PM (TcoRJ)
You're absolutely right FLLaw. Overwhelming force is exactly what we need to finish this fight. But the pace and intensity of this war is dictated by the media (just ask Israel), and our military brass is much to gunshy for fear of drawing some bad press. The result is, our more-than-capable military is over there fighting with both hands tied behind their backs while not offending their tender religious sensibilities in doing so They are also tasked with trying to win hearts and minds which is a waste b/c it is in their very culture to hate us . God forbid we kill too many insurgents! Bush said at the outset of the war that we were going to come after the terrorists and the countries that harbor them. Bullshit. We are sitting stagnant in Iraq letting them come to us. We need to be rolling through these countries (Iran & Syria namely) one at a time like shit through a goose leaving nothing behind but dead terrorists and anyone else who gets in our way. And then we need to leave a note on the door on our way out saying "If we have to come back, then things will get really bad for you." The performance of our military leaders does need to be examined, and the duds thrown out on their asses. Strap on a pair of balls or write parking tickets.
Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at November 09, 2006 02:51 PM (CtVG6)
8"Coalition Forces killed four terrorists and detained"
I bet that really pisses Greg off! Hah hah hah hah ha ha ha ha
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at November 09, 2006 09:03 PM (vixLB)
Just got terrifying news today that my newphew and his buddies nearly "got it", one at least did a 19 year old.
My details are sketchy for I did not talk directly to him, but got this from his mother, who told her mother (my mom too) who told me.
But what I was told, some Marines were ambused by a bunch of insurgents in the Ramdai area. It was instant chaos. My nephew and three of his buddies ended up on one side of the knoll which was the WRONG side of tht knoll. He said he was so close to the enemy that he could read a "name tag or label" on the shirt of that insurgent (less than 10 meters away). It took like eternity for them to get to the other side of the knoll for they were pinned down, but they did. My nephew stated that he was able to kill a sniper.
The only way they were able to escape from this town or part of town was to break in from house to house, using weapons to destroy the locks on the doors, hurding the residences into a room, regroup, then go to the next house down the row and do the same until they finally got to the end and out.
Sadly, my nephew lost one of his best buddies (one of many) when the 19 year old stepped on a EID (Explosive Improvised Device) that was remote controlled. My newphew had been in that same spot and was very nearby when the device did go off. My nephew remained uninjured.
My nephew's thoughts were "please save me God and put your angels around me...please save me" during this ambush for it was hell.
After his buddy was killed, he cried out to the Lord " oh please God take some of the angels you have around me and put them around my buddies please protect them and me".
I don't have any further details as to the total number lost, beyond the one 19 year old and the extent of other injuries, if any. I will be looking in the news today and tomorrow to see who this 19 year old is when the report comes out.
After their escape from the ambush, he finally went back to "base" which is not much of a secure base. Their base, from what I understand, is pretty much were they all gather to huddle. He was so dirty for he had not showered in 28 days and he was extemely hungry, but all he could do was remove his boots and use some wash towelettes we sent him and clean his feet from all the water he had to walk through to avoid "trench foot" type problems. Water comes from major air strikes that busted water mains in the area that have been flowing for many days as I understand it.
He collapsed and slept for 18 hours solid. Then was so GRATEFUL for some of the food goodies that his grandma (my mom) had sent him. You know we can't send pork for that would be "insensitive" to their culture? We are a "F...ed" up nation.
When he talked to his mother she knew something was wrong and finally he unloaded letting it all out for an hour and a half over the satellite phone. It also stated, "it is really hell here".
His four years with the Marines were almost up, before he went over there a few months ago, and they were not going to send him there with his 4 years up in February 2007. But he insisted and agreed to extend his time with the Marines a few months to March 2007 so that they would send him so he could be with his buddies and not left behind as they fought risking their lives.
But with seeing his buddy blown up and it being "hell there", I wonder if he regrets going? If so, he has never said and continues to fight like there is no tomorrow. I just pray for him and his buddies there are tomorrow's and many more to come.
My parents and his mother are on pins and needles. My dad is a loving Christian man who loves to sing for the Lord. When I saw my mother, she was gasping like she was about to hyperventalate due to the anxiety after having just been told the story of the ambush. My dad looking upward with eyes whelling up in tears cried out "God forgive me, but I Hate these people".
And I do too....Dear God please damn these people...Damn Islam...Damn them all to hell and thank God there is a hell.
I know that is wrong to feel that way, but I'm human and with everyone of them who is shot dead, like the sniper, I sadly get satisfaction that they are in hell with his "prophet" Muhammad.
God I hate these people and I despise the people that give them support from the Iranian donating some of his wages to support the insurgents, the Muslims who march in the streets for them, and the American Congressman who wants to give them "RIGHTS" and treat them like "accused criminals" in a law enforcement action. As far as I am concerned, "waterboard and more" them all. Better yet kill them in the field so they don't get a lawyer paid by me or a quran handed to them at Gitmo by Americans wearing white gloves so not to offend their sensiblities for it is not proper for an infidel to handle a quran, because we don't want to offend. Like I said, "we are one F..ked up nation".
Oh for the old days of bombing like Dresden and Tokyo where we firebombed them all. As far as I am concerned, one American soldiers', airmans', or marines' life is worth more than a million of the enemy, including their men, women, and children. None of them are worth my nephew...my marine.
Thank you for letting rant...I feel a little better now.
I look forward to the day we can kill them here or at least deport them. That day is coming and may God damn them, but without Christ they are damned already.
Note I did not use the Lord's name in vain for I mean it.
Posted by: FLLaw33870 at November 09, 2006 10:11 PM (38GUY)
"Marine Lance Cpl. Ryan T. McCaughn, 19, of Manchester, N.H., was killed while conducting combat operations in Anbar province, Iraq, according to Department of Defense. He was assigned to 1st Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Lejeune.
And I will spare the graphic details (for my nephew was there) of what they found when they were able to return to collect what was "left" of his "body", just in case a family member should per chance see this post.
Posted by: FLLaw33870 at November 09, 2006 10:37 PM (38GUY)
11
"was killed while conducting combat operations in Anbar province, Iraq"
Sounds so clinical...so neat & tidy...
Posted by: FLLaw33870 at November 09, 2006 10:38 PM (38GUY)
12
In that I.E.D. explosion, I just learned that 3 or 4 other Marines got thrown by the explosion. One Marine got thrown OVER a house and over to the street at the NEXT BLOCK. My nephew advised that the Marine thrown had a concussion and is not taking what happened very well. I think he is the youngest in the group, but then again my nephew is 21 and the other Marine buddies of his call him "old man".
It was nice to talk to him today. I asked him if we needed MORE troops there, and he said in Ramadi we need at LEAST TWO MORE BATTALIONS. But what does he knows, he is just a grunt and General Casey is the genius (sic).
President Bush should be firing a few Generals and I would start with Casey, because Bush said if the generals need more troops Bush would authorize it and Casey doesn't ask for them.
Yet I know one Marine who is in the worst of the worst part of it in Ramadi who says otherwise.
Posted by: FLLaw33870 at November 10, 2006 10:36 AM (38GUY)
Glad to hear your nephew made it out alive and in one piece. I'm no soldier, but in my opinion, we don't need two more battalions in Ramadi. We need a couple MOABs (google it) and C-130s to drop them out of. Why risk American lives over a stinkhole like Ramadi? Lets give the citizens 24 hours to vacate, and any military aged male trying to leave the city must have a family. After that, just level the entire area. Set up tent cities for the refugees and call it a day. To hell with clearing house to house like we did in Fallujah. Why risk American lives over mud huts? Ramadi is the new Fallujah, and it needs to be demolished with extreme prejudice.
Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at November 10, 2006 05:33 PM (CtVG6)
Via FOXNEWS: Eric Ruff, the Pentagon press secretary, said he participated in meetings with Rumsfeld on Wednesday morning and heard no talk of changing war strategies or of Rumsfeld leaving his post. He said he did not know whether Rumsfeld has talked to President Bush about his future in light of the election results.
The focus of U.S. strategy for stabilizing Iraq remains the same, Ruff said: handing over more control to the Iraqi government and encouraging the leaders there to make political progress on reconciliation and resource sharing.
Rusty hascalled for thisseveral times. It's a shame it took loosing an election to get it done. I like Rumsfeld but he is past his prime. I'm sure Lincoln liked McClellan too. No one liked Grant, but he did win. Rumsfeld is a McClellan on the inside and Grant on the outside. Never quite willing to take the risks necessary for victory.
The President has Nominated Robert Gates as the new Secretary of Defense.
Denver Post: Gates is the president of Texas A&M University and a close friend of the Bush family. He served as CIA director for Bush's father from 1991 until 1993.
Gates first joined the CIA in 1966 and served in the intelligence community for more than a quarter century, under six presidents.
4
Read Woodward's latest book. Rumsfeld is poison and has been his entire career.
Really? Well I read "Plan of Attack" and in that he praises Rumsfeld
for his restructuring of the Pentagon from the Cold War mentality that
the Generals would not let go of without a fight. He also praised
Rumsfeld for Afghanistan. Were those parts of Rumsfeld's career?
Posted by: Randman at November 08, 2006 01:52 PM (Sal3J)
5
I don't know George, when are you signing up to go hunt for him?
Posted by: Cdat at November 08, 2006 01:53 PM (1ISxl)
6
Yes he is. Old is not bad but old and stubborn can be bad if you are too stubborn. I like stubborn I really do. I may have been a bit hard on him. He served us well but in the end his best quality, his stubbornness, is also his weakness.
Posted by: Howie at November 08, 2006 01:53 PM (D3+20)
7
Stubborn also refuses to acknowledge, or change their mistakes. Hopefully this is a step forward.
Posted by: davec at November 08, 2006 02:07 PM (QkWqQ)
Posted by: Rusty at November 08, 2006 02:19 PM (JQjhA)
9
Yeah well Rove is surprisingly still standing. He hasn't quit and he probably won't.
Posted by: George Ramos at November 08, 2006 02:26 PM (wkRws)
10
Please answer the following questions: What were the Taliban, Saddam Hussein, Moammar Qhaddafi and A.Q. Khan doing during the Clinton administration and what are they doing now? How many Al Qaeda leaders, foot soldiers, terrorist cells, terrorist training camps and funding operations were captured, killed or put out of business? Want to talk books? Read a real book by someone with real knowledge, something like "Imperial Grunts" by Robert Kaplan. Like many brilliant men before him, Rumsfeld will be vindicated over time. Didn't the "Greatest" generation lose more soldiers in a couple of hours on one beach in France than we have lost around the world in 6 years? And lastly, did you know that more soldiers died annually under Bill Clinton than have died annually fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan combined? Statistically one of the best war fighters in history with the least(by far) loss of life. Thank you Mr. Rumsfeld!
Posted by: allen at November 08, 2006 02:29 PM (adnFb)
Any proof that Rumsfeld didn't take the risks necessary for a victory? How did he override the desires of Bush and the Pentagon? Is coddling Al Sadr Rumsfeld's idea?
President Bush is responsible for everything that happens in Iraq, not the Secretary of Defense.
By dumping Rumsfeld, Bush has told the American people that the Dems were right all along. Happy days.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 02:34 PM (bLPT+)
Only a moron would cite a pimp like Woodward as a military expert. The guy is a serial liar and a shitty writer.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 02:38 PM (bLPT+)
13
Sorry thats my opinion. I feel we've halfassed both wars. We underestimate what it woudl take. We should have went in there big time searched every house and left not one metal object behind. The advantage you only have to humiliate the populatiuon one time. they you run martial law for a few years to gain stability. They you can give them freedom. To achive the objective you have to be willing to be fucking ruthless in the short term. Quite a contraditionm I know but I'm right.
Posted by: Howie at November 08, 2006 02:43 PM (D3+20)
Yeah, the Israelis kicked Lebanon's ass though they didn't get their three boys back.
Posted by: Dale Gribble at November 08, 2006 02:53 PM (wkRws)
15
Bush initially ran with one of his platform planks being the modernization of the Military . . And Colin Powell fought that tooth and nail . . Powell, and the generals wanted the Cold War Military, not the new light, quick one Ruimmy and Dubya envisioned.
That being said, Dubya "short shifted" when he went into Iraq prematurely . . his "Military" wasn't where it should have been, and they have never "Caught Up" . .
We have forgotten how we handled the Post WWII . . MacArthur and Marshall with occupation until they felt the japanese and the germans were ready for democracy . .
I maintain, "The Republicans don't know how to fight a war, and the Democrats don't have the balls to" . .
Posted by: large at November 08, 2006 03:17 PM (fEUSs)
16
Israel did not win in the new dynamic, while there is still a leadership member of the terrorist organization alive to declare victory, Israel has lost.
While to the West breaking shit, and killing the enemy is a victory - to the middle east surviving the above is their sign of "victory"
Posted by: davec at November 08, 2006 03:17 PM (QkWqQ)
And it seems as if you've missed the importance of Woodward. He's important because he was the house reporter for the Bush White House for the first 6 years. That bought him access. Fortunately, he still had enough professional reporter left in his bones to recognize what that access allowed him to see. Hence, book three.
19
Howie, I think Rumsfeld's mistake was that he tried to run the war the way a manager in a corporation administers a project. He should've left the war to the generals. This criticism notwithstanding, I believe D. Rumsfeld was all-in-all a good decent guy, though perhaps not the best person for the job he was assigned.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at November 08, 2006 05:56 PM (vixLB)
20
I agree I don't dislike him. I appreciate his service. You have a good point. But in th comparison with teh civil war generals the Sec of defense is more like what thier roles were back then. So he is the general. Therein is the mistake. By golly you are right again.
Posted by: Howie at November 08, 2006 06:05 PM (D3+20)
I don't think you contradicted yourself at all. I agree that an iron fist should have been wielded against Iraq and especially Afghanistan. I just don't agree that Rumsfeld ever had the option of doing so.
In my opinion, the softer, gentler, war approach was Bush's stupid policy, and Rummy had to mold his strategies around it. I think Bush sacrificed him for no good reason, and aided left by doing so.
I also think Bush got his ragingly stupid policy from the pussies in the Pentagon. It's a little known fact that they're career bureaucrats and the most risk averse ass-coverers in government service. I think they got the last laugh against Rummy for discarding so many of their shitty ideas policies, and personnel.
Even Richard Clarke complained about them in the Clinton years. They were the ones who convinced the poll-watching Clinton to let Bin Laden run free. Their tactic is to thump their medals and say that in their "experienced military opinion," blah, blah, blah.
If Bush would replace them with young and hungry Patton types, the islamopithecines would be cowering around the world.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 08, 2006 06:17 PM (bLPT+)
Posted by: osamabinhiding at November 08, 2006 08:41 PM (ZxuJ4)
24
Q
Whats the difference between a rooster and Osamabinhiding?
A
A rooster says: Cockle doodle doo! Osama says: Any cock will do!
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 09, 2006 02:26 AM (bLPT+)
25
Q
What's the difference between Jeff "BigHoles" and Gayrooster?
A
Absolutely nuthin'! If you don't find that insulting, I give up!
Posted by: osamabinhiding at November 09, 2006 02:44 AM (ZxuJ4)
26
Osama bin hiding: Good name. Says it all. Osama bin hiding something in his mouth.
Posted by: Greyrooster at November 09, 2006 05:56 AM (dk0ga)
27
Grey-shiveled-cock: My name is a reminder of your repug party failures, clean and simple. At least the leftards know who the real bad guys are. I'd call you a cocksucker too, but nothing would fit into your mouth with all that shit flying out of it all the time.
Posted by: osamabinhiding at November 09, 2006 02:46 PM (ZxuJ4)
A retired priest committed suicide by setting himself on fire in a German monastery in protest at the spread of Islam and the Protestant Church’s inability to contain it.
Roland Weisselberg, 73, poured a can of petrol over his head and set light to himself in the grounds of the Augustine monastery in the eastern city of Erfurt, where Martin Luther spent six years as a monk at the beginning of the 16th century.
I know certain people will be disappointed that he didn't immolate himself in a mosque. Yanno, so they could gibber "CHRISTIANS DO IT TOO!!!!!!!!!"
1
He was old and got confused. He was suppose to set the Muslims on fire.
Posted by: Randman at November 04, 2006 07:15 PM (Sal3J)
2
The words of General Patton come to mind "No bastard willing to die for his country ever won a war. Wars are won by the bastards who kill the other bastards willing to die for their country... Kill the enemy; make HIM die for his country."
Nevertheless, may this preachers soul rest in peace.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at November 04, 2006 07:54 PM (1juA+)
3
Remember the episode of South Park when Chef set a Buddhist munk on fire to protest racism? Well I wished Rev. Weisselberg had taken a page out of Chef's book and set a Mo-slime Imam on fire instead of burning his own good self.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at November 04, 2006 07:58 PM (1juA+)
4
One word STUPID. When I go I wish to take as many muslims as I can with me.
Posted by: Greyrooster at November 04, 2006 08:22 PM (cNF2m)
5
What the hell was he thinkin? Did he ever stop to wonder how much that was gonna hurt? Crazy.
Posted by: JeepThang at November 05, 2006 02:30 AM (yZQoS)
6
The man followed the commandments of his leader.
"Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends." John 15:13
He set himself ablaze to shed light upon the creeping evil.
Let us honor him by not letting his sacrafice be in vain.
Posted by: GI Joe at November 05, 2006 07:22 PM (0euLV)
7
Set the world on fire. It will still signify nothing.
Posted by: tbone at November 06, 2006 01:11 PM (HGqHt)
8
I'm sorry, the good reverent missed the lesson of Vietnames Buddhist monks setting themselves on fire: Make sure you have pictures. He should've set up a video camera to record his actions. There's no story without pictures anymore.
Posted by: Jabba the Tutt at November 06, 2006 11:04 PM (TXHvg)
Yes, the Middle East is “unstable,†but for the first time in memory, the usual killing, genocide, and terrorism are occurring in a scenario that offers some chance at something better. Long before we arrived in Iraq, the Assads were murdering thousands in Hama, the Husseins were gassing Kurds, and the Lebanese militias were murdering civilians. The violence is not what has changed, but rather the notion that the United States can do nothing about it; the U.S. has shown itself willing to risk much to support freedom in place of tyranny or theocracy in the region.
Instead of recalling any of this, Iraq is seen only in the hindsight of who did what wrong and when. All the great good we accomplished and the high ideals we embraced are drowned out by the present violent insurgency and the sensationalized effort to turn the mayhem into an American Antietam or Yalu River. Blame is never allotted to al Qaeda, the Sadr thugs, or the ex-Baathists, only to the United States, who should have, could have, or would have done better in stopping them, had its leadership read a particular article, fired a certain person, listened to an exceptional general, or studied a key position paper.
1
" Yes, the Middle East is “unstable,†but for the first time in memory, the usual killing, genocide, and terrorism are occurring in a scenario that offers some chance at something better. Long before we arrived in Iraq, the Assads were murdering thousands in Hama, the Husseins were gassing Kurds, and the Lebanese militias were murdering civilians. The violence is not what has changed, but rather the notion that the United States can do nothing about it; the U.S. has "
blah blah blah! Yes the usual killing, genocide and terrorism goes on just like before except that we are trillions of dollars in debt and have earned the disrespect of practically the entire world, and for what? Well, as Mr. Hanson says for some chance at something better. A chance is just not worth it! If the world hates us anyway, forget the chance and take out the threats with nukes!
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at November 03, 2006 07:53 PM (Dd86v)
2
Last gasp, you know what's wrong with your statement. You're a pussy who worries what other countries think. I think you're an asshole. Go cry to momma now.
Posted by: dick at November 03, 2006 10:24 PM (MeFt3)
3
Larry - What percentage of GDP is our current debt? What is the historical avg since 1945? Disrespect? Oh, P-L-E-A-S-E! You must be French.
Posted by: MCPO Airdale at November 03, 2006 10:42 PM (3nKvy)
You Libs sound more and more like jihadis every day.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at November 03, 2006 10:49 PM (8e/V4)
5
Even leading neocon proponent/architect/hawk Richard Perle now says the Bush Administration has turned the war into a disaster.
Knowing what he now knows about the Bush handling of the war, he says, "I probably would have said, 'Let's consider other strategies for
dealing with the thing that concerns us most, which is Saddam supplying
weapons of mass destruction to terrorists,'"
One man's opinion, of course, but one of the biggest players in the run-up. My God, having Perle say this about our position today is about one step from having Dick Cheney saying it. That's where we are today, folks.
If you're going to throw a war, you really do have to be competent.
Posted by: Gleep! at November 04, 2006 09:53 AM (a7sMc)
6
Uhh, democracy and freedom are not for everyone. Many many people are content with the stability a dictatorship offers and enjoy their freedom from not having to make decisions! Some are too stupid to realize this concept because they have the " my way or the highway " mentality. Like Dickhead Cheney who just posted above! If you are not concerned with what other countries think then you are a moron! Shouldn't you be at the local park, picking off tame geese and ducks and an occasional lawyer?
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at November 04, 2006 01:36 PM (Dd86v)
) so that they don't vote to go to war based on "flimsy evidence" before voting against it or whatever it is these idiots do.
I suspect Pakistan may have killed or injured Ayman al-Zawahiri or critical elements responsible for his ability to communicate and release statements. Of course al-Qaeda’s response to the elections coming from the Iraqi wing of the organization may have been a strategic propaganda call, but it also may be designed to carry attention away from a huge loss.
