War Is Too Serious to Involve Liberals
War is a very grave affair. Instead of just money, it involves risking the lives of men and women with our policy decisions. On the battlefield, people will be killed without trial. Lives will be ruined. Cities will be decimated. It is an intensely serious matter — the most serious matter a country can engage in — which begs an obvious question. Why do we involve liberals in it at all?
There’s an old expression I just made up: There’s no liberal in a bear attack. In matters of life and death, like a bear ripping apart your house, there is no time to morally preen and pat yourself on the back for how smart you sound. Back in the day, life was pretty brutal for everyone, so there just weren’t any liberals. Unserious people starved to death or were mauled by giant sloths. With death lurking around every corner, people had no time for useless worries like whether warming the ozone would kill unicorns or whatever.
Things are a lot easier now — so easy that even useless people can survive — and thus we now have to suffer liberals. But we have one brutal leftover from the olden days. War. And it’s not something a liberal is ever going to learn to deal with.
As the country plans to increase efforts in Afghanistan, the pointlessness of involving liberals in such a crucial issue really becomes apparent. During the presidential campaign, they were whining that Iraq was distracting from the real war in Afghanistan. And now with Afghanistan the focus, are they gung ho? Do they want to eradicate the awful Taliban, which oppresses its people and gives aid and comfort to al-Qaeda, who murdered thousands of Americans?
Of course not.
Liberals have only one piece of wisdom to add to any discussion about war: “This war is just like Vietnam!” That’s it. Nothing else. Every war is Vietnam, and Vietnam is very bad. That’s all they know. I’m not even sure how they protested wars before Vietnam (“This war is just like 1812!”). And to distract from the fact that they have one argument, they also have the non sequitur of calling people chickenhawks.
And if someone was in the military, they’ll say he is still a chickenhawk because he’s not in it now. And if someone is in the military now, then if he believes so much in the war, why isn’t he over fighting it just this instant? And even if someone were to meet a liberal’s impossible standards for having the right to argue for a war, it would be completely pointless to engage them on the subject, because all one could ever get out of them is, “This war is just like Vietnam!” They’re annoying, shrill, and repetitive; it’s like arguing with an alarm clock.
Funny, and true.
Actually, wars today ARE exactly like Vietnam – unlike WWII, we don’t fight to win, to defeat the enemy, hell, we can’t even NAME the enemy these days.
We conduct wars to promote ”stability” as a prelude to appeasement-minded diplomacy, we engage in ”nation-building” not winning. Victory is no longer part of our vocabulary.
Well, yeah. And Selma was, as every schoolboy knows, the high point of American political consciousness. But that’s left-liberals for you:
They concoct strawmen, destroy them, and then claim that’s what conservatives meant all along.
They make unconditional assertions of fact, and when those assertions are refuted, decline to admit error or to stand their ground.
They invoke “science” when real science is nowhere in sight.
They make ad hominem and tu quoque sallies as if they were proof of their position. Likewise their appeals to emotion and accusations of hard-heartedness.
They cite “authorities” who have no objective claim to authority, but fail to respect authorities who’ve earned their authority through actual achievement.
When all else fails, they spout nonsense and blame conservatives for not understanding it.
There is absolutely no reason to argue with such persons — about anything.
Frank, someone needs to report you to law enforcement. Your hate speech about Liberals is shocking.
Frank, you are a sick man. You need psychological help. Don’t blame the liberals or the jews for your own shortcomings.
Very good post. I’m still laughing because of the liberals in my family say what you posted and it’s a riot, mirror image, same rant, OMG do you know my family by any chance?
I served in the Vietnam War, and FYI, the Vietnam War wasn’t “just like Vietnam”. The conventional wisdom narrative is total BS.
What drivel. How many “liberals” died ion WWII? Korea? etc etc
It was the neo-cons that put us into a war. It was Bush who avoided military duty and a few liberals still in Congress that fought in Nam.
Facile generalizations meaningless.
Actually, “Progressives” will tell you that they do not “really” hate the military. As one Clinton staffer related, when he saw the Blue Angels’ flyover on Bill’s inauguration day in 1993, he first had a visceral revulsion toward them- and then reminded himself, “Oh, yeah.. they’re OURS now.”
The liberal/progressive hatred of the military returned in full force, however, once he and the rest of Clinton’s crew realized what The One and his crew (in many cases, retreads from Clinton’s) also realized about halfway through their first month in power. Namely, that laws like posse comitatus prevent them from using the U.S. military for what they regard as its only “legitimate” mission- controlling the American people and suppressing dissent from their “enlightened” rule.
“But other countries do it that way!” was their refrain. Yes, they do. So did King George III of England. This is why we have such laws.
This also explains their reaction to Honduras. An army that arrests a President, on the orders of that country’s Supreme Court, because the constitution states that he has committed a crime? Oh. That’s. Just. Wrong.
(When the President is a “right-thinking” socialist, that is.)
This probably explains why The One wanted a “domestic security force as big and well-funded as the military”. If He can’t use the Armed Forces the “right way”, He’ll just get somebody else to do it.
Meanwhile, screaming “Vietnam!” at every turn is a good way to muddy the waters. Besides, one of the great pleasures of being “progressive” is designating groups of people (soldiers, capitalists, gun owners, etc.) who are just so inherently awful in the sight of “right-thinking people” that they can despise them for their lack of “sensitivity” and “propriety”.
This way, they can indulge the vice of prejudice, while telling themselves it’s really proof of their own higher degree of enlightenment.
It’s all about them feeling good about themselves, after all.
clear ether
eon
Frank J. Fleming, this is one of the best posts I’ve ever seen on any blog anywhere! Good for you for finally calling liberals out on such a serious matter such as war. But let’s not forget that there are libertarians out there (like Ron Paul) who also refuse to fight for much of anything. And please, before all you left wing nuts out there start writing that I’m some sort of war monger and would jump at the opportunity to start a war, nothing could be further from the truth. I never thought we should have invaded Iraq, but that didn’t mean we should not have added substantial military pressure on Saddam Hussein without invading the country. We never fully explored a full naval blockade of that country (like we did during the Cuban Missile Crisis) or a massive bombing campaign like the one we pursued in Bosnia and later with greater effect in Kosovo. We went straight to an invasion, which was a bad idea. Iran is currently another example where we have plenty of military options available to us without having to invade that country as well (again by using blockade or bombing or even large-scale covert operations designed to overthrow the government). However, Afghanistan was different. It was always the right decision to invade that country given its geography, but it was a huge mistake for this operation to descend into a nation-building exercise. We should have gone in, killed (yes, kill, NOT capture, but KILL) as many of the Taliban or al Qaeda as possible, and then we should have left. That country is never, ever, going to be a modern nation allied to the Christian West. Deal with it. Pumping more money and troops into that nation is just a losing proposition given the tribal nature of that country and the deep Muslim fanaticism endemic with its population. And don’t get me wrong, I’m as conservative as they come. But just clinging to an idea of victory in Afghanistan won’t make it so. Places like Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, and countless other dirt holes around the world were designed for what the British once called “Punitive Expeditions.” You went in, did as much killing and damage as possible, and then left. If those people attacked your interests again, you went back quickly and did it again. In and out as fast as possible. It cuts down on American casualties and cost. Believe me, the people in those countries will get the message if you hit them hard enough and often enough. Don’t believe me? Well, there hasn’t been any problems in Kosovo for 10 years now, ever since our massive bombing campaign forced the Serbs to back down. So it’s not war Americans may take issue with, but how it’s fought. If we make better use of our massive power, rather than always trying nation-building in failed states, we would have much better results.
they kind of remind me of cheer leaders dressing up like football players, kind of cute but you wouldn’t suit them up for the playoffs.
I am dying here!!! What a great/true article!
Hilarious!
thank you and God bless
“The next time we go to war, let’s just not tell liberals about it. We’ll tell them we listened closely to their rhyming chants and were quite impressed by their papier-mâché puppets and thus decided to give peace a chance and whatnot. And then we’ll go through with the war and only let Fox News cover it and distract the other networks by framing a celebrity for murder or something.”
What do you mean “next time?” That’s what happened “last time.” But you got one part of your formula wrong; the distraction part. You see, it was Fox News that devoted 12 times more coverage to Anna Nicole Smith than to Walter Reed, mirroring their approach to covering the war in general. Why? Because we weren’t greeted as liberators. We weren’t paying for the war with Iraqi oil. Liberals knew that “It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months” was complete bulls***, as was “We know where the (WMDs) are, north, south, east and west of Bagdhad.” And when two thirds of the American people got fed up and turned against this misbegotten right wing circle jerk, what did Dick Cheney say? “So what?”
Tell you what, here’s a better idea. You little boys can still play war, but stick with Civl War re-enactments. Save our troops and our treasure for genuine causes. And when real war is necessary, we’ll all support it . . . . wait . . . excuse me, I hear the public address system with an important announcement . . . “Mr. Hannity, your waterboard is ready . . . paging Mr. Hannity, Mr. Sean Hannity, we’re ready to fulfill your pledge to charity by getting waterboarded . . . . Nothing to worry about . . . just a “little splash of water” as you say . . . paging Mr. Hannity.”
Apparently war is too serious to involve conservatives, too.
Frank J. Fleming is not really engaging in political humor. He is almost writing in a literal sense. Leftists are childishly immature people. They are not to be taken seriously and must be marginalized for their own good and everybody else’s. Joseph Schumpeter some sixty-five years ago said they are the inevitable result of an affluent society that can afford to pander to their infantile desires. Today’s leftists are usually the grandsons and granddaughters of those who actually earned the money. These brats only know how to parasite off the host. They eventually begin to hate the exploited suckers and do everything possible to destroy them. Their actions are ultimately suicidal—but they are too stupid to realize it.
In the spirit of the liberal meme “I support the troops but not the war” I submit the following statement:
“I support the President but not his administration.”
Racist.
I think the reason liberals think every war has to be like Vietnam is that they ‘won’ that one by making America lose. It’s their H.S. track trophy.
I’m far from being a liberal, but when the same mistakes are being made in the war that the jihadists dragged the rest of the world into,with what happened in Vietnam, it can be said that there are similarities with Vietnam.
In “The Lost Crusade:America in Vietnam” by Chester L. Cooper, in the very early chapters we see Franklin Delano Roosevelt concluding that the life of the Vietnamese was worse after 100 years of being a French colony. Part of it was the support of the Vietnamese people giving tacitly to the Japanese, because they concluded life as a Japanese colony was preferable to life as a French colony. For what resistance was made by the Vietnamese people to the invading Japanese? (As an aside, I would like to see what was the legacy of Vietnam being Japanese territory, to see if life was better under the Japanese, or if it was the case of Ukrainians welcoming Germans after Operation Barbarossa was launched, because the Soviets were repulsed. But that is a different tale).
What FDR had in mind was a preparatory regime, so that eventually
Vietnam would be able to govern itself. He figured it would take
50 years. Well, that plan wasn’t implemented.
Now, we have Malalai Joya pointing out the corruption in Afghanistan, which goes to show that Afghanistan is as ready to govern itself today, as South Vietnam was ready to govern itself at any time from the French surrender at Dienbienphu to the last US military helicopter leaving Saigon.
However, given the liberals incredibly short attention span, succinctness is not balanced with comprehensiveness, nor will it ever be.
#16. Liberals are now a race? Thats rich.
Stop, if you’ll excuse the expression, you’re killing me! That’s the loudest I’ve laughed in a while. Thanks.
“it can be said that there are similarities with Vietnam.”
The Vietnam War was not lost on the battlefield. No, it was lost in the leftist intellectual and media centers of the United States. You should read Mark Moyer’s, Triumph Forsaken: The Vietnam War, 1954-1965. The Communist leadership open admitted that our nation’s leftists were indispensable to their winning the conflict. They couldn’t have done it without them.
#8 lapides say: “It was Bush who avoided military duty…”
What I hate most about libruls is their insane habit of repeating lies over and over again. The cockpit of a jet fighter is a funny place to hide from doing your military duty, now isn’t it? What branch of the service were you in, Fred?
#18 “…Now, we have Malalai Joya pointing out the corruption in Afghanistan…” Corruption in Afghanistan? Oh, yes, a lot of Congress persons are making that case, Rangel, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, Dodd, Murtha, Franken and a lot of other U.S. corrupt and unsavory legislators.
The U.S. Congress runs on corruption of one kind or another. Just look at the way they travel and why.
Frank Fleming: look here simpleton: I am a liberal and support our efforts in AfghANISTAN all the time. That being siad yes it can turn out to be like vietnam if we don’t conduct the right way.. stop bundling people.
The problem is, it’s Obama who is making Afghanistan into Vietnam redux. I suspect that’s his plan- he knows he can’t get away with cutting and running immediately, so he saves face by sending a paltry number of reinforcements with a countdown timer, so that he can claim later “Well, we gave it the old college try, but it’s unwinnable and time to quit.” In time for Nov 2012 of course.
Government is too serious to involve conservatives.
Oooh lookie! I made an attack on a whole political group and lumped them all in one group! Can I haz blog now?
Your avatar is disturbing. Is that face paint you smeared on your face, or is it your own feces?
Hey
I don’t thinking it is fair minded to be judgink the Liberal for all this things
They just listening to the commies too far from the common sense thinkings
Give chance, they come around
You will see
Okay?
@26: Sure, there’s always room for one more over at the Daily Kos.
“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.”
John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873)
Actually, when you think about it, the current war is actually worse than the Vietnam War. That war was fairly simple in that it was not about oil or rice or rubber or Vietnamese culture producing religious nuts having sudden jihad syndrome. It wasn’t about Vietnamese nationalism, since the South Vietnamese were as nationalistic as the North Vietnamese. It was about Uncle Ho who, curiously, was not fighting for some indigenous Vietnamese cultural ideology but was fighting to impose a neo-Stalinist ideology exported from the West. Liberals of the New Left were in bed with Uncle Ho and have colored the American historical narrative to their advantage ever since. Some of the same players are doing the same political gig today, only the Vietcong are now the Palestinians. Unlike Stalin and Uncle Ho, imperial Islam has been around for 14 centuries, behaving much like a virus. Unlike Stalin and Uncle Ho, the self life of the New Left was even shorter, and apparently they think they can play with Islam while enjoying herd immunity.
Now and Then said “And when real war is necessary, we’ll all support it”
No you won’t. And, if you have your way, we will have lost the capability to actually fight. You know, I know it.
32 Old Soldier: true words!
If we pass a Natl health bill, it’ll never go away; it’ll be the latter day bread and circuses; the budget will be sucked up with interest payments and a massive group of govt officials who will run it as AMTRACK is run. No one will ever be fired, they’ll all retire with great pensions and when money has to be squeezed, they won’t take cut: like the Post Office, they’ll close branches, shorten hours . . . Just as we do in California.
Money for defense just won’t be there. Besides, Now and then does not believe in fighting for anything. He sees no difference between the US and the USSR worth fighting for. neither did anyone in the 30′s. It was a close call then, and will be even closer next time.
But its so fashionable and stylish to be cynical, jaded, …above it all. The crude people who worry about having to fight for something…are always so distressingly direct and annoying. Its easier to ignore the facts. Everyone knows sensible people don’t want to fight. ….
“they want to save the world through changing their light bulbs.”
WRONG!
-it was proper tire inflation.
Hmmm…
Many of us well-educated liberals see unmistakable parallels between Vietnam and Iraq/Afghanistan precisely because they are wars in which the enemy, ‘insurgents and extremists,’ are actually the very people we’re supposedly “liberating.” The masses of Iraq and Afghanistan do not take kindly to folks touting “liberty” in the form of Predator drone strikes against wedding parties, and genetic disorders caused by radioactive ordinance, nor to the notion of Western Crusaders fighting wars against Islam (and that’s what they look like to a billion or so Muslims, despite our assurances otherwise) on their soil. Short of nuking population centers and population-wide chemical and biological weapon attacks, there is little chance of a ‘victory’ in Iraq or Afghanistan. Both were garunteed to be shameful, pointless chapters in American history, especially Iraq (I mean, 9/11 at least gave us a damn good reason to go to Afghanistan in 2001). We will either be there permanently, protecting the resources and pipelines for the powers that be, or we will withdrawl our forces, just like Russia, the British, the Ottomans, etc.
While the military officials tally body counts, the ‘bleeding-heart’ liberals are often far too busy doing Christ-like things to concern themselves with how best to efficiently slaughter and subjugate the world’s brown people. It’s so funny to me that the conservative movement, with its touting of nationalism, guns, war, violence, intolerance, hatred and lack of concern for their human brothers and sisters across the planet, is so inextricably tied up with Christianity. How strange it is then that it is the liberal folks who are actually out there helping the poor, feeding the hungry, speaking and acting out against violence and war and generally doing whatever they can to do actualize those ideas that Jesus Christ is thought to have promoted! I don’t recall where Jesus suggested that sanctions and wars that kill and maim millions of innocents are acts of charity or peace.
Conservatism these days could easily be seen to be a catch-all word for jingoistic ignorance, sociopathic nationalism, and/or religious zealotry. Just sayin’! Great post though!
27. If I had to guess, I’d say it was mud.
#35
Hmmm, haruph, hesh hesh.
Us well-edumacated libruls love Jesus and do His work daily. Youse others are bad people. This is how good I xprise mysef. Oh, my friend an collegue, Mr. Grunwell, wellcum to the frey. Just sain!
Luv an piece to al.
“Many of us well-educated liberals”
The term “well-educated liberals” is something of an oxymoron. Your post reflects a pathetically awful education. The odds are that you “earned” your credentials in the last forty years when a liberal arts degree has become something of a joke. Affirmative action policies have lowered the academic standards of both minority and white majority students. At best, you come across as a second year college student studying at a third tier school.
35. I call BS on the genetic disorders. I’m a nuclear engineer, and I just got done writing a paper on the effects of a nuclear bomb detonation, which exposes people to several orders of magnitude more radiation than depleted uranium ordinance. Fact is, there is no evidence that any level of radiation exposure causes heritable genetic defects. That means no amount of radiation, from background levels all the way up to nuclear fallout, will cause heritable genetic defects. Instead, high levels of radiation exposure to the testes or ovaries will cause temporary sterility, as sex cells get killed off, rather than damaged, by high levels of radiation. After 60 years of research from the atomic bombings, nuclear accidents and radiation workers, there is no evidence whatsoever that radiation causes mutations that can be passed on to offspring.
FYI, liberals are hardly ever Christ-like. What they are is generous with other people’s money (read: covetous). Jesus would rebuke most of them as hypocrites.
“I’m a nuclear engineer”
I am sure that your degree is well earned. The soft sciences have suffered enormously because of lowered standards resulting from the affirmative action policies of the last some forty years. A nuclear engineer, however, must be able to back up their theories with undisputable empirical evidence. 2+2=4 remains true even though a French deconstructionist philosopher claims otherwise. A hard science graduate cannot get away with spewing some postmodernist gibberish premised on gender equality and one’s right to their “narrative.”
John Grunwell’s little missive is just screaming for a point-by-point rebuttal.
Depleted uranium causing genetic disorders? Egads, I didn’t think anybody was still around who believed that kind of idiocy.
Undoubtedly he’ll pull out ye olde Million Dead Iraqis nonsense.
I hope for his sake he’s pulling a reverse-Moby, in which case he might even understand to what I’m referring ….
Some thoughts:
1)While Frank,s diatribe is emotionally satisfying it tends toward the irrational glorification of war. I suggest Frank read “The Cost of Wars” by John W. Denson. This book is rooted in the ideas of Americas founding fathers and and weighs the pros anc cons of war in what to me was a powerfully convincing way. The immediate costs of war are in lives and treasure but the long term costs are worse. War (win or lose) creates larger government, more taxes, inflation, more statism, more war and an astonishing breakdown in morality and religion. War and its aftermath creates the very liberals that Frank and most of the patriotic readers of this blog detest. I used to think like Frank until I read this book.
2)We are fighting our current wars stupidly and on our enemies terms. Our so called leaders cannot even utter the name of the enemy or mention the word “Victory”. The enemy knows sun tzu instinctivly. In the Afganistan theatre the enemy swims in a sea of Pashtuns who are the most treacherous, cunning and barbaric people on earth. There are 41 million of them. They have been slitting throats for eons and will be long after we are gone from there.
3)We lost the Vietnam War. Now they are begging to sell us cheap stuff and offering us their cheap labor and friendship. They are desparate for us to be tourists in their beautiful country. Their natural and tradional enemy is China. They are making remarkable market reforms and have become huge agricultural exporters even as that sector’s percentage of GDP falls. In a few years they will probably be more free market than we are. The only country they have bothered was Pol Pots Cambodia. What was our ultimate strategic goal in the Vietnam War again? Aside from the obvious losses we also gained the hippie movement, the liberal congress’s, huge inflation and an army of libtards, bureaucrats, and wefare bums, porous borders, almost a complete breakdown of traditional morality and culture and on and on and on… Are the costs worth the gains?
Mr. Fleming:
Yup…pretty much seems to be so.
What really concerns me is the “accepted wisdom” of the Moonbat Sweat Lodge Hive-mind that ALL supporters of a military action, without exception, are motivated by commercial avarice or malignant racism, while absolutely no opponent of US military action is motivated by anything other than noble altrusitic pacifism.
This is so manifestly a travesty that I am constantly amazed that nobody calls them on it.
There are certainly people who support US wars because they want to make a buck or kill people…or both, but there are also people whose opposition to US wars is motivated by disloyalty and treason.
When Moonbats are the first ones to call out the traitors among their ranks, they might be taken a bit more seriously.
(Of course, if they DID realize that not all anti-war protesters are selfless and moral Quakers, then they would no longer be Moonbats).
We need a new era of McCarthyism…and this time a much more thorough and far-reaching one.
#35 John Grunwell:
“Many of us well-educated liberals see unmistakable parallels between Vietnam and Iraq/Afghanistan.”
Quite so. There are US forces involved, they’re wearing uniforms, and they’re even shooting M-16′s, while their enemies are firing AK-47′s, (largely)…by God, it’s EXACTLY like Viet Nam!
“The masses of Iraq and Afghanistan do not take kindly to folks touting “liberty” in the form of Predator drone strikes against wedding parties, and genetic disorders caused by radioactive ordinance,”
There must be something wrong with them, then, since the Germans, the Japanese, and the Italians seemed to respond to exactly those things quite well. And we did a whole lot more of it to THEM than we’ve done to Iraqi insurgents or Taliban schmucks.
Maybe that’s their problem…we just haven’t done ENOUGH of it.
Heck…even the Viet Namese are kinda-sorta our pals now, and we bombed the living snot outta them!
“Short of nuking population centers and population-wide chemical and biological weapon attacks, there is little chance of a ‘victory’ in Iraq or Afghanistan.”
Hmmmm. Evocative statement. I’d respond by asking:
“What would FDR and Truman do?”
(We all know the answer to that, don’t we?)
“How strange it is then that it is the liberal folks who are actually out there helping the poor, feeding the hungry, speaking and acting out against violence and war and generally doing whatever they can to do actualize those ideas that Jesus Christ is thought to have promoted!”
Oh is THAT what you tell each other you’re doing? It seems a lot like wealth redistribution to me.
The Christ may have befriended them, but he wasn’t a tax collector…even for the Temple Building Fund.
“I don’t recall where Jesus suggested that sanctions and wars that kill and maim millions of innocents are acts of charity or peace.”
Maybe you didn’t read the part where he instructed the Apostles to sell a spare cloak and buy a sword…what do YOU think he had in mind with that order?
#43 Sure, Cedric, while you hunt for you wee, we are able to read really silly sentences like this one by someone who apparently knows nothing about our enemy except that he sides with them: “We are fighting our current wars stupidly and on our enemies['] terms.”
So the enemy has terms? Do you mean rules of engagement? The enemy has lawyers on the battlefield to keep their fighters out of legal scrapes with the International Red Cross (who are enemy sympathizers)? They read the Miranda rights to any of our soldiers who might be captured? Do you mean the enemy honors the Geneva Conventions? Do you mean they got to choose the area of battle? No, the two Presidents, past and current, and Congress chose that, and they have and still do support the war. Didn’t you know that? Are you so critical of our new Pres.? Where have you been my gentle but muddle-headed friend?
Amen! Hell, if liberals think handguns, cigarettes and pocket knives are too dangerous, how can we EVER trust them with war?
John Grunwald:
“The masses of Iraq and Afghanistan do not take kindly to folks touting “liberty”… Short of nuking population centers and population-wide chemical and biological weapon attacks, there is little chance of a ‘victory’ in Iraq or Afghanistan.”
Do you actually know anything about Iraq, especially the events of the last three years? Apparently not, since you seem to be completely unaware that “the masses of Iraq” turned on the al-Qaeda psychopaths and that between the citizenry, the tribal militias, the Iraqi Army and police, and the US military, we achieved….get ready for it… victory. Which of course you will blindly deny because to you anything but defeat in Iraq is, to quote The Princess Bride, “inconceivable.”
—-
There’s hardly any point in bothering to refute your tired old atheist’s nonsense on Christ-as-commie, except to point out that we conservatives are in fact doing far more of the actual feeding the poor and tending the sick than you self-proclaimedly ‘compassionate’ liberals.
“the conservative movement, with its touting of nationalism, guns, war, violence, intolerance, hatred and lack of concern for their human brothers and sisters…Conservatism these days could easily be seen to be a catch-all word for jingoistic ignorance, sociopathic nationalism, and/or religious zealotry”
Oh, I get it. You’re just a narrow-minded bigot. But then, we knew that from the moment you declared yourself a “well-educated liberal”- meaning, of course, a baselessly conceited adolescent with a sheepskin.
“Mission Accomplished!”
And if the article wasn’t hilarious enough, the too serious mofos want to debate the content! I’m on the floor here but I’m obviously an unedjamacated sort. Fact check on aisle nine! “Many of us well-educated liberals see unmistakable parallels between Vietnam and Iraq/Afghanistan/DISNEYLAND/ … bla bla bla.” Great material, keep it coming!
* okay he didn’t actually say DISNEYLAND.
Very funny but true
I would add that Quakers served in every war until the draft was ended, and I’d be shocked if they don’t continue to serve; they just serve in non-combat roles like medics, cooks, and the supply corps. These are critical jobs for the war effort, and in the case of combat medics, dangerous as well. They just don’t have to pull a trigger or press a button and actually kill anyone. And of course, some Quakers do carry rifles, despite their beliefs. Sgt. York was one such man, and his sniping skills allowed him to capture an entire company of German soldiers single handedly, earning him a Medal of Honor. Funny thing about soldiers who want to live, they’ll tend to surrender when they see their comrades struck dead before they can react.
Sirs:
Great article. Very true about the survival and floating to the top of the defectives. However, please look up decimate. It sounds like CBS when Hiroshima has been “decimated”. It was devastated.
owok
Now I know why you write comedy. You’re not good at that, but my god…”they, they, they”, awful crap…if there’s a community college in your area, take a writing course for your own sake.
*Chuckles*
Sometimes it’s nice to just see things stated in such a blunt and funny manner.
I’m just launching tactical nukes in your fallacious arguments. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NzA4XLjRaM
23. Fred Beloit:
#18 “…Now, we have Malalai Joya pointing out the corruption in Afghanistan…” Corruption in Afghanistan? Oh, yes, a lot of Congress persons are making that case, Rangel, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, Dodd, Murtha, Franken and a lot of other U.S. corrupt and unsavory legislators.
The U.S. Congress runs on corruption of one kind or another. Just look at the way they travel and why.
—————————————————————–
And guess what, thanks to matters not dealt with at the beginning,
the war between the states was fought.
Take a look at what Malalai Joya is saying, rather than just react
to this very short summary.
great blog, and they really came outta the woodwork in the comments.
now some of those commenters need to go back and do some research on nam. like all the way back to the vichis collaborating with the japs then work your way forward. a good place to start.and stay away from the fiction.
as far as liberals go(not to get stereotypical but) they don’t want to have to fight for ANYTHING and when someone else is willing they’re afraid if they don’t stop ‘em they’ll have to fight too. They don’t want to have to truly work for anything either unless they can get together with other like minded folks and protest having to fight or work or stand for something that you have to fight or work for. you know actually earn your place in life.
Click on this link, http://www.fpif.org/articles/interview_with_malalai_joya to see what Malalai Joya is saying. As well as this: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/story.html?id=2248841
So, guess who pays when the wrong person, or people are backed.
Sgt York was no Quaker. He was an evangelical Christian – probably closer to a Baptist, with an independent non-hierarchical clergy, than anything else.
Sgt York was a conscientious objector who did not overcome his moral objections to killing – but who did overcome his moral confusion about serving in the US military during time of war. His history serves to this day as a great lesson in resolving personal moral quandaries regarding public duties.
And yes, Liberals should not be involved in war. Their moral relativity is idiotic in the face of determined opposition. It seems the only thing for which they can not find tolerance in their hearts is anyone in the US who thinks differently from them.
And to the jackass who wrote about the avatar on the column – it is one of the iconic photographs of this war.
Apparently john grunwald has forgotten which president was responsible for escalating Viet Nam and as Commander-in-Chief was responsible for the idiotic ROE. Every time you bring up Viet Nam you demonstrate exactly why cowards like you have no business being included in matters of war. So john if you’re going to keep referring to Viet Nam have the balls to admit gutless liberals like you are the reason it was the cf it was. If you’re to spineless to do that than at least have the courtesy to STFU.
Man, every Frank F column is basically a retelling of that old joke: “How many lefties does it take to change a lightbulb?”
And right on cue they all show up with the answer: “That’s not funny!”.
It never gets old.
from the French surrender at Dienbienphu to the last US military helicopter leaving Saigon.
Oh, what an euphemism, the French surrendered in dien dien Phu, while the Americans were leaving Saigon.
But, but in reallity that was the contrary our soldiers jumped into the hell hole of Dien Dien Phu knowing that that was a lost cause, and you were leaving Saigon before that the Hell happened, cuz the Viets were at the city borders !
Hi im from the uk and here are some thoughts. No 1: dont let the left wingers run your country weve had 12 yrs of that and The uk is now a broke shithole of a country with areas where no indigenous person can go without being attacked and worse. As an exserviceman, the Left have no business running wars, churchill was tory, thatcher was tory and both won wars. Blair and brown are labour and look at the mess were in. an winable war in afganIstan… I think we should pull out and use the forces 4 uk.
59. I stand corrected on Sgt. York’s religious affiliation. Nevertheless, Sgt. York was also an illustration of the value of deterrence. Most of that German company survived because they didn’t want to chance fighting back against York as he picked off their comrades in line.
57. macko:
“as far as liberals go (not to get stereotypical but) they don’t want to have to fight for ANYTHING”
Mitch McConnell, Trent Lott, Jon Kyl, John Ensign, John Boehner, Roy Blunt, Rudy Guiliani. Mitt Romney. Fred Thompson, Dick Armey, to Delay, Bill Frist, Rick Santorum, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney (perhaps the most cowardly of all), Newt Gingrich, Phil Gramm, George Will, Bill O’Reilly, Bill Bennett, Pat Buchanan, Rush Limbaugh. Pat Robertson, Bill Kristol, Sean Hannity, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Ralph Reed, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Todd Palin, Michael Medved Ted Nugent, Toby Keith, Charlie Daniels, JC Watts, Michael Savage, Mark Levin, John Cornyn, Richard Shelby, Ann Coulter, Saxby Chambliss, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Dana Rohrabacher, Joe Lieberman . . . the people you listen to for your world view, the people you elect, the people you idolize . . . patriots . . . chickenhawks one and all.
But they’re willing to do this . . . to Max Cleland. You remember Max, right, the effing coward.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYjR_EBhS
Conservatives have destroyed America. Liberals are rebuilding it. So sit down, STFU, and thank your lucky stars we haven’t rounded you all up and stuffed you into a giant cage in West Texas.
#66
Wow NAT and hey now. Thanks for the list of great names, anyone of whom should have received the Nobel Peace Prize instead of POTUS Obama, who had accomplished exactly nada to earn it.
“…chickenhawks one and all…” And look what a new word you have so robustly invented. What branch of the service were you in, me bonnie cockade?
#66
Say, NAT, I reported to your link as ordered and what popped out was the face of that mutt Keith Untermann. Is this a joke?
This tidbit (which is a about the size of Everest) pretty much sums it up.http://www.rutherford.org/Oldspeak/default.asp. Search for, America under Barrack Obama, Nat Hentoff interview
Great post my friend, even the funny bits rang true.
67. Fred Beloit:
“What branch of the service were you in, me bonnie cockade?”
The one that entitled me to a Purple Heart. And you, my little gandy dancer?
55.”saddam ago-go”would have been more appropriate.
66.”Conservatives have destroyed America. Liberals are rebuilding it ”
perhaps a little remedial reading is required:
http://changingminds.org/techniques/propaganda/modern_%20propaganda.htm
“Disconfirming evidence or opinion can be very destructive for propagandists, so these must be removed, drowned out or discredited (which adds further to the complexity of the propaganda effort).”
you’re drowning in “disconfirming evidence” ain’cha?
#66 Now and Then:
“Conservatives have destroyed America. Liberals are rebuilding it. So sit down, STFU, and thank your lucky stars we haven’t rounded you all up and stuffed you into a giant cage in West Texas.”
Oh, really?
I’ve never had the pleasure of West Texas, but from what I know of the rest of the state, well…to quote George Strait:
“…and Texas is a place I really love to be.”
You might have a point in your rage:
“But they’re willing to do this . . . to Max Cleland. You remember Max, right, the effing coward.”
Except that you rather conveniently forget about President George Herbert Walker Bush, who was shot down five, (5), times in the Pacific by flying his aluminum gas tank with wings torpedo-bomber low, slow, and straight at the side of Japanese warships.
What was that term the Liberal “Smart Set” tagged him with?
Oh, yes… “the Wimp Factor”, wasn’t it?
To benefit their darling candidate, the “politically viable” draft-dodger, Bill Clinton.
Convenient memory you have.
#71 BS! There are 2 Purple Hearts and 2 Bronze Stars in my family, and you sir, don’t fit. If you have a Purple Heart, you fell and skinned your knee and had the ACLU sue the military for one…or you are making it up.
___________
These comments are hilarious. Liberals just can’t help themselves. Idiots to the freaking marrow.
74. Auntie Em:
Well, Auntie Em, what can I say. There are seven, count Em, seven Purple Hearts in my family. One is mine.
But unfortunately, I can’t say that your ignorance and your cowardly appropriation of other’s courage is new or surprising. You find yourself in the miserable company of similar chickenhawk wenches who disparage those who give them the freedom to sit on their fat asses at home gorging on Pepsi and cake while henpecked husbands loofah their scaly feet.
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/bivens_outrage/1262
Which of those Purple Hearts or Bronze Stars are yours? What memories do you have of battle? How many fire fights have you survived? How many friends have you seen gutted? How many times have you been under fire and not known where it’s coming from or which direction to shot back? How many kidneys have you lost to shrapnel? EF YU, EM!
Tell you what, just stick with baking pies and buying cucumbers. We’ll take care of the rest.
As for you Bilgeman, your wimpy response is proof enough.
Speaking of liberals, the wisdom from Maureen Dowd:
“During the climactic showdown at Tora Bora, Rummy distracted Gen. Tommy Franks by demanding that he freshen up an Iraq invasion plan. The insufficient number of troops at Tora Bora was a harbinger of things to come in Afghanistan, as the Bush administration heedlessly moved on to Iraq.
“Afghanistan was a vastly underresourced operation because, as some of the generals say in the Pentagon, we were just out of Schlitz,” Gates said. “We didn’t have any more troops to send.”
Ok, since we’re playing what if games, maybe if the Air Force wasn’t twenty percent female, the Army ten percent, and the Marine Corp six percent, maybe there would have been enough boots on the ground to kill bin Laden. Maybe. Or is that to sexist?
#66, “So sit down, STFU, and thank your lucky stars we haven’t rounded you all up and stuffed you into a giant cage in West Texas.” Now and Then provides evidence that underneath every so-called liberal is actually a fascist just waiting to round up their political adversaries. Nice comment, Slick, I didn’t realize that the SS issued purple hearts.
Have an Evil day
77. DrEvil:
Purple Heart . . . you got one? Didn’t think so. Back to your Palin porn.
Now and Then, if you really are a Purple Heart Awardee, then I’m sure you wouldn’t mind telling us which branch you served in, what years, the country you were deployed to, and the injuries for which you were awarded a Purple Heart. Surely you can recall this. See the thing I find most suspicious about your story is that most real vets would actually answer the question about which branch they served in, rather than dodging the question while boasting about the medals they earned. Fakers, however, love to dodge questions when pressed because while civilians may not be able to spot flaws in their story, active duty members and real veterans will. If you are the faker that so many of us suspect you are, you should be glad that falsely claiming to be a Purple Heart Awardee on a blog doesn’t qualify as a violation of the Stolen Valor Act.
79. myth buster:
FU mythbusthole . . . I can recall a hell of a lot more than that. Most vets I know don’t talk AT ALL about IT. You know what IT is mythhole? No, I didn’t think so. I suggest you stay back ion the farm with Auntie Em, you know, take care of the home front.
#71, 75
Now, NAT, you have kicked up the BS meter so high the needle is breaking through the glass cover. This is really getting a big laugh around here. Why not go for the Medal of Honor, there Audie? Seriously, though, what was your MOS? I’ll trade with you, mine was 1542. Don’t be modest, now.
81 Fred Beloit
Nice try, Fred. When did you last take fire?
The last time I took fire was five minutes ago when I ran across a mine field under heavy motar fire from Taliban and Nazi brigades to save a bag of puppies that were about to be indoctrinated by Chairman Mau to become his unholy army of the night.
No seriously, flaunting military service as a STFU to anyone is a weak argument. I see this on both sides of the argument and it shows a basic lack of argumenting skills. Serving in a combat roll does not give you the right to argue about military matters. The First Ammendment gives you that right. If you’re for a war, fine. Against it, fine. Just have a logical argument for your position. Pointing out what you did or may not have done really doesn’t bring any new thought to the argument. Just makes you look like you havent thought out your position and need to bring in guilt to feel like you’ve won an argument.
N&T, I know several active duty Marines, and they would never deny the fact that they are Marines. Ditto for Naval personnel. If these vets you speak of aren’t merely a figment of your imagination, I’d wager they’re all Vietnam draftees who got seriously messed up in the head over there.
#83 BigRichardSmall:
“I ran across a mine field under heavy motar fire from Taliban and Nazi brigades to save a bag of puppies that were about to be indoctrinated by Chairman Mau to become his unholy army of the night.”
God Bless you for that…nobody ever thinks about the poor puppies!
MOS 0351 here, if anyone’s tallying…are we playing bingo?
I didn’t really have an MOS under fire, since the Merchant Marine doesn’t go in for the uniform and ranking thing…even when you’re on a big haze-gray unarmed ship and the Iraqis are lobbing SCUDS at you.
84 Myth hole . . . What did I deny? I said, “Most vets I know don’t talk AT ALL about IT. ” You dont’ knwo what IT is. I have no need to defend anything more than I have already done. Your opinion of that is irrelevant.
And yes, you’re welcome.
Fred? Fire? . . . Right.
Just to let ya know, liberals sucked before, now and forever!! It’s ALWAYS the Warrior class that takes care of these pukes!!
Hey PJ Media! Do you know how lost you are (and how incredibly silly and naive you look to us libs, hehehehe) by giving this fleming a platform?
Check the link for the back story on that very famous picture of the “Marlboro Marine.” his name is Lance Corporal James Blake Miller and your conservative really showed what “support the troops” is all about.
http://mediastorm.org/0020.htm
How ironic, a “tough guy” conservative who never served (unlike this nice guy lib – 7 yrs US Army, second wave in Afghanistan) uses a picture that actually has a back-story revealing the inadequacies of republican leadership. Awesome!
Hey Hey, I’m new. suppose make an introduction.
See ya!
and Thankyou
(apologise if this is the wrong thread to post this)
Your information is so useful! Thank you so much! Keep on going,I will keep an eye on it! One more thing, Plz visit my websites about how to protect your Home Contents from disaster:Contents Insurance For Tenants
Your article many inside said, let me feel a lot, I’ll continuous attention, and I hope you more in the future, I will update the first to see you article..That is my web site :wholesale nfl jerseys factory
新房装修
Your blog is very good,it reacts many trues in our contemporary society,I reallise a lot,also welcome to see my website :discount north face