While Iran continues to make it clear they are hell bent on nukes and their buddy Zarkawi continues to incinerate every human being he can find, our narcissistic politicans continue to see the world through the perspective of their own ambitions. Nothing new here, of course, but in this age of nuclear proliferation, it’s reached a new level of self-centeredness. Other than Bush hatred, I would like to hear one serious word from the Democrats (and I am still registered as one) about what we really should do about Iran, Zarkawi, etc. So far it’s been deafening silence.
MEANWHILE: From the Wash Times: At least 200,000 persons demonstrated yesterday against the recent bombings of three luxury hotels, while a new online statement attributed to terrorist leader Abu Musab Zarqawi defended the attacks and threatened to cut off the head of Jordan’s King Abdullah II.
Two hundred thousand demonstrators in Amman and not a word so far from the New York Times.
The situation is very scary. It’s as if to the Democrats, nothing exists other than the political squabbles–the external world isn’t even there at all.
It all seems so similar to the chain of events that led to the French debacle in 1940. Andre Maurois writes of his talk with Paul Reynaud, who had just become Premier, about his Reynaud’s feud with Daladier:
“Nevertheless,” (Maurois) said, “Daladier is certainly a man who loves his country.”
“Yes,” Reynaud said, “I believe he desires the victory of France, but he desires my defeat even more.”
Probably unfair to Daladier (as Maurois notes), at least at the conscious level, but seems to be true about many of today’s Democrats.
ìOther than Bush hatred, I would like to hear one serious word from the Democrats (and I am still registered as one) about what we really should do about Iran, Zarkawi, etc. So far it’s been deafening silence.î
The Democrats, on a practical basis, are now the enemy of Western Civilization. They cannot be trusted in matters of national defense. There is no possibility that a strong leader can survive its presidential nominating process. The Democrats are intimidated by the Moveon.org and Daily Kos crowds. I will be brutally frank: a vote for a Democratic presidential candidate will likly be similar to voting for the extermination of your family and other loved ones. Am I perhaps speaking prematurely? Isnít that campaign some three years away? It doesnít matter. The radical left has captured the Democratic party. Nothing is going to change. These people are solidly ensconced.
Via Rantburg from JihadWatch:
Iran on Friday took the highly unusual Unusual in that the NYT usually prints enemy propaganda for free, but times are tough at the NYT. step of running a costly full-page ad in the New York Times defending its nuclear activities and accusing the United States and European allies of creating an “unnecessary crisis.”
—
Earlier this year, Die Welt’s english newscast had a 10 minute segment on Iran and why they “needed” the reactors.
My experience with many lefties is that they believe their own propaganda;
-The terrorist threat is Right Wing hype designed to induce fear in the public.
-What enmity exists against us is justified by American aggression, attrocities, and imperialism.
-Bush and the Republicans are the biggest threat to world peace and stability. Many extend this concept to the Chompskian view that America itself is the biggest source of terrorism in the world today.
-We must implement a policy of listening to the grievances of our adversaries, understanding our culpability, and reaching out to them in an effort to make ammends.
In other words they are Gramscian Marxists to the core, though few of them think of themselves as Marxist.
Of course they are delusional beyond redemption and must be fought as if our very lives depend upon their defeat. Because they do.
Paul,
I was with a bunch of Hollywood lefties last week (nobody of Roger’s stature, but some successful), and they absolutely believe lies. When shown the truth, they refuse to believe even the most obvious and wrap themselves in sound-bytes and false propaganda.
That the Bush 43 administration has failed miserably at PR is true. But anyone with an ounce of integrity (and who doesn’t suffer from extreme BDS) has to see how craven and dishonest the democrats and their media buddies have become.
These are scary times for Western Civilization.
I would think that the King of Jordan could track down that bastard Zarqawi and deal with him.
Now that the crazy homicidal maniac [insurgent to the media] has managed to kill enough Muslims both in Iraq and Jordan I think his time maybe running out.
Surely Abdullah has contacts the US military would not have access to.
I actually got referred to this posting via OSM .
I now see what you are attempting to do with the new ‘delivery’ vehicle and its linking to blog commentary.
Might I suggest with respect to OSM that instead of just 1 ‘news’ item on the main page with others being available via the ‘next’ button, that more stories are listed there to catch the eye of the viewer, and that these in term lead to further articles of interest?
I can see that this service might well have merit, but it needs to be LARGER if that makes any sense at this point. Perhaps it’s just a matter of ‘staff’ but there should be more items linked to blog analysis,and these items should be the focus of the site. Other things could be buried in a sidebar.
As to the ‘media’, they are almost a worst infestation than the ‘insurgents’ and ‘militants’ to whom they give de-facto support. I ‘understand’ the terrorists. Frankly I think we all ‘understand’ the terrorists. I defy anyone to explain to me what the media thinks it is achieving with its tendentious,perfidious ,propagandistic approach to ‘reality’. Qui Bono ?
ìOf course they are delusional beyond redemption and must be fought as if our very lives depend upon their defeat. Because they do.î
This is definitely an apt description of the Democrats who possess the veto power over that partyís presidential nomination. They fervently believe, subconsciously, if not even consciously, that America is experiencing justified ìblow backî due to its past imperialistic policies. We have allegedly filthed on the Arab world and the terrorist activities of the Islamic nihilists are an inevitable consequence. Furthermore, the United States permitted the Jews to steal land from the Palestinians. Osama bin Ladin is something of a victim—and George W. Bush and his allies are the true threats to world peace. The reactionary values of radical Islamism will disappear virtually overnight when the forces of International capitalism have been defeated.
You’re still registered?!
I turned Independent a year or two ago after one of Kennedy’s mad rants and wrote the party saying goodbye to all that…which put me on the John Kerry emailing list!
Should one ever vote for a Democratic candidate? I wouldnít hesitate to vote for Joseph Lieberman if I lived in Connecticut. As matter of fact, it might be better to normally vote for the strong defense Democratic politician over their Republican foe. We do not want to have only one major party devoted to the war on terror.
We must be very cautious in 2008. The Democratic Party strategists will attempt to market their candidate as ìpro-war.î Even the Daily Kos will play along with this charade. I can imagine it now:
ìWe have fundamental differences with the candidate, but they are sufficiently suitable to justify our support.î
Hillary Clinton will be marketed as another Margaret Thatcher or Golda Meir. How might we be able to discern the truth? That is very easy: If the radical left is not calling her a bitch or a c*unt—then you know the con is on. A strong defense candidate will most assuredly be described in very vulgar and graphic terms.
It’s not just disappointed Democrats (like Roger and many others here, including me) who are hard on the Democrats. Take a look at one of Roger’s colleagues:
Mohammed on Murtha
Jamie Irons
Humans won’t evolve at the same rate even within the same resource base. Maybe that’s all they have, or will ever be capable of. The New York Times might currently be the very best at what it has always been – but a changed population (that seems to return to an old food source out of habit) is no longer really interested.
The New York Times: All the news (we see) fit to print.
While I would hate to be accused of interrupting the “Lefties are Traitors” froth fest, I am going to have to challenge Roger’s statement that Zarqawi and Iran are friends. Zarqawi is a Sunni Islamist who aligns himself with al-Qaeda, which holds that Shi’ites are infidels. Iran is a Shi’ite theocracy. In this case, the enemy of my enemy is still my enemy. Thank you for your attention. Froth on.
ìI am going to have to challenge Roger’s statement that Zarqawi and Iran are friends. Zarqawi is a Sunni Islamist who aligns himself with al-Qaeda, which holds that Shi’ites are infidels. Iran is a Shi’ite theocracy. In this case, the enemy of my enemy is still my enemy.î
The enemy of my enemy is my friend concept is of far greater importance. Their common hatred of Western liberalism bonds them in a perverse manner. Please donít forget that the United States also bonded with the USSR during WWII. Strange bedfellows? Yes, but it happens more often that you are willing to admit.
John, you might want to cut back a little on the shochu and look into a couple of other points:
(1) Look up the provenance of the phrase “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”.
(2) Consider, historically, the many instances of two historical enemies making an alliance against what they consider a greater enemy. instances that occur to me offhand, without much thought (I’ll admit I thought about it while I was feeding the cats just now):
- Japan and the US against the Soviet Union
- Germany and NATO against the Warsaw Pact (and you could make a similar argument for the Warsaw Pact, but I don’t see that as being a voluntary alliance)
- The US, UK, France, and USSR against the Third Reich
- the Serbs, Croats, Montenegrins, et al (I’m forgetting someone, oh, yeah, Bosnia and Macedonian Yugoslavia) in Yugoslavia
- England and France against Germany
- the Ottomans with, and against, pretty much everyone at one time or another.
(3) The number of reliable reports of highly sophisticated IED components, weapons, and a certain number of reports of trained insurgents, crossing into Iraq from Iran.
There are plenty of good strategic reasons why Iran would love to see the US out of Iraq, lots of good doctrinal/social reasons they’d love to see the US get it nose bloodied, and plenty of reason to think that both Sunni and Sheat would figure “Let’s get rid of the US first, then we will undoubtedly conquer all because Allah is on our side.”
I’d suggest you get some stronger arguments — and a little actual evidence wouldn’t hurt — than “Sunni and Sheat can’t get along.”
While I would hate to be accused of interrupting the “Lefties are Traitors” froth fest, I am going to have to challenge Roger’s statement that Zarqawi and Iran are friends. Zarqawi is a Sunni Islamist who aligns himself with al-Qaeda, which holds that Shi’ites are infidels. Iran is a Shi’ite theocracy.–Shochu John
Actually while I froth away here I still have time to agree with your analysis of the Al-Queda/Tehran Axis. I don’t see this as particularly likely either. The enemy of my enemy may be my friend but not really in this case I think. Two varieties of fanatic nutbar which hate each other even more than they probably hate the assorted ‘great & little Satans’.
However as to all lefties —well let’s be kind here, and say merely that while they are not the dreaded “T” word, they are demonstrably, how shall we say, somewhat patriotically-challenged.
You might feel that this makes them just ever so sympatico, but for some of us it makes them at best ‘useful idiots’ and at worst an ‘objectively’ de facto 5th colume. I frankly don’t think the ‘left’ has either the will or the ability to be any more than sand in the gears of history, but really who wants sand in the gears?
200,000 protestors? That’s all!? Oh c’mon, Momma Moonbat’s much more interesting … http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=18296_Mama_Moonbat_Word_Wrangler&only
The democrats’ first real policy statement on record was essentially Murtha’s call for withdrawal. Not good for them.
Worse was to have all those democrats saying things like how come millions of Iraqis can’t handle just 20,000 insurgents? Why can’t they do this on their own? They sounded like petulent children. Not good for us.
Ummm, what was Neville Chamberlain’s comment again when he found out the bolshies aligned with the Nazis?
Something they would never, never do, of course.
However, friends/buddies might be too strong a word. How about business associates?
Charlie,
“I’d suggest you get some stronger arguments — and a little actual evidence wouldn’t hurt — than “Sunni and Sheat can’t get along.”"
Hmm, well, let’s look at the evidence you have provided here. Firstly, examples of natural enemies cooperatign against a larger enemny. Fair enough. “Highly credible” reports. Yes, I have seen such reports, and none of them struck me as highly credible. Perhaps you would care to enlighten me as to what reports you are referring and what makes them credible, because this is still an unlikely alliance despite any “enemy of enemy as friend” principle. Try this one. The enemy of my friend is also my enemy. Iran is allied with SCIRI and has been for years. The Sunni insurgence is also in direct conflict with SCIRI. That prison we just found was being run by their militia and it was full of Sunni insurgent types. Iran is going to switch sides and help them? Does that make sense. Iran decides to give them aid at the same time their allies in Iraq are zapping their balls with a car battery. Sorry, doesn’t wash.