<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

This is unbelievable!

The Democrat party has never recovered from the period between 1968 and 1975, and here's another sign.

In 1968, the Democrat Convention in Chicago was overrun by hippies. End result: today's netroots types make a fuss, and Democrat apparatchiks roll over. Don't want the hippies back out in the streets, dontcha know. Don't want America to see the real thug face of America's Socialist party.

In 1973 Democrat apparatchiks cut off all aid and support to the government of South Vietnam. By 1975, the North Vietnamese had taken South Vietnam, the re-education (i.e., concentration) camps were open, and boat people were dying on the high seas in frequently futile attempts to escape the communist government.

The Democrat apparatchiks never lived down the disgust of the American people, for having abandoned an ally in the field. So, they're not going to abandon Iraq outright.

No, they're going to "pursue a slow-bleed strategy."

As in slow-bleed our troops.

As in slow-bleed those Iraqis who believed in us.

As in slow-bleed those Iraqis who voted.

As in slow-bleed the power of the Executive branch.

As in slow-bleed the patience of the American people.


Why strive for leadership when you can strive for power? That's the question our political class is putting to us this day.


It's a pretty shameful day to be an American.

Comments:
You got a better idea? The rate of US Soldier casualties has been increasing linearly since 2003 and it can be argued that the relative stability of the country has been inversely proportional. Clearly having 140,000 potential targets in the holy land isn't really doing much to help the situation.
 
"Slow bleed the Iraqis who voted."

You seem to care about the members of the "Religion of Pieces" when it suits your argument. If the "Iraqis who voted" care they should step up and defend their country. The reason they won't is because the concept of Iraq as a unified nation is an idea that they don't believe in. How is a US presence helping this civil war of Sunnis vs Shiites and Kurds?

There are soldiers who are on their 3rd or 4th tour in Iraq right now. They are not getting to watch their kids grow up and their wives are leaving them in record numbers. Try not to forget the human toll of this conflict.
 
Contestant #1: My better idea is to actually win. And recent events - like Mookie bugging out - indicates that this may well be possible. Mind you, the Democrat party seems as determined as ever to hamstring the troops in the field.

Contestant #2: When they're out to kill innocents, they're members of the "Religion of Pieces". When they're living peaceful lives and harming nobody, they're Muslims. See? It's not that difficult, is it?

I mean, I'm not so ignorant as not to have heard of salafists and sufis.

If it'll help at all, I'm mulling a new disorder: Sudden Jihad Syndrome.
 
Oh, and contestant #2: We have an all-volunteer force. When your contract's up, you can leave. Stop-loss may delay you a bit, but you can leave.

Thanks for playing.
 
Mr America,

If you would, please elaborate on this statement:

"Contestant #1: My better idea is to actually win. And recent events - like Mookie bugging out - indicates that this may well be possible. Mind you, the Democrat party seems as determined as ever to hamstring the troops in the field."

This seems to be the type of ambiguous rhetoric I've grown to expect from your party. It's a formula:
Step 1 - Make a feel good statement
Step 2 - Attack the opposition as being weak.

The missing ingredient is how to actualize what is said in step 1. Who wouldn't want to see us 'actually win'? I'd love to see it! My original question remains unanswered though: what is your better idea? What will we do differently this year that we've failed to do the past 4 years? Every year we're told to hang on and every year it's gotten worse.
 
I disagre with you completely. Guess what? Since 9/11/01 we've taken the fight to the Religion of Pieces and we've had no more assaults in America.

Moreover, we've been killing al Qaeda fighters in massive quantities. Not that you'd know from reading the papers: their story is we're losing, and no contrary evidence can be reported.

If youwant to see hat could happen, take a look at Kurdistan. After Desert Storm, we protected them from Saddam for over 10 years. Kurdistan is now quiet, peaceful, and attracting a lot of Turkish investment.

If you really want to understand where we're going in Iraq, understand that we've been in Germany for over sixty years, after rebuilfing Europe via the Marshall Plan.
 
How can you disagree with the fact that every year we have an increasing rate of casualties in Iraq, an increasing level of successful IED attacks, an increasingly competent enemy, and a more chaotic middle east? Your only benchmark for success seems to be how safe and comfortable you are at home. That is unfortunate. Try convincing the soldiers in the line of fire or the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi refugees that had to leave their homes that we are winning.
 
A stable Middle East gave us 9/11/01. After that, I feel like rattling a few cages.

As for my selfishness, wll, at least it's a motive that can be trusted. Unlike, say, our altruism.
 
Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?