Today PAT BUCHANAN is a good guy!

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

His new book pointing out how truly dangerous the unchecked illegal immigration is to the survival of our country moves him out of my personal dog house. It has also become a best-seller, which should tell politicians of both parties what the public sentiment is for the invasion by illegals.

[GottaHavePride]

In this case I think the appropriate response is "even a broken clock is right twice a day".

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

In this case I think the appropriate response is "even a broken clock is right twice a day".I don't know if he's wrong THAT often, but he's not one of my favorites. He's hit a homer with this book, however.

[StoopTroup]

I think carry-on luggage should be banned on all Commercial Aircraft.

I also think that the Airlines should guarantee the safety of your baggage.

The Hub Systems in the huge Airports have got to be improved and I think the Government should hold some responsibility in making sure all the luggage is scanned so that the incident over Lockerby Scotland won't happen.

El Al, Israel's Airline uses bomb-proof containers on all of their planes. We should probably begin to use their extreme level of security in the U.S.

I hate the "Tumbstone Mentality" of the current administration.

We spend billions in helping a Country that doesn't seem to want our help, yet we continue to just make small changes in Airline Security because they don't wish to really do what it takes to secure the Airways. Every time the Media does a focus piece they concentrate on the Airlines and at the end mention that one of the other problems are the Inner-city Transports and Amtrack....both of which are even more lax in security.

The Borders and the Airways are breached and are part of the lack of security for Citizens, Taxpayers and visitors to our Great Country.

Since 9-11 I've heard some complain about the changes but most folks seem to rather have a high level of efficient security than to be concerned that their Civil Rights are being violated some how.

If your Dead...your Civil Rights don't seem to be your biggest worry anymore.

I really don't wish to seem to be an extremist in matters like this but I think it's just time we consider the realities we face.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

.

I hate the "Tumbstone Mentality" of the current administration.

Say what?

[StoopTroup]

Say what?
Once you have a problem....you fix it.

There is no looking ahead IMO.

The FAA and this Administration are simply putting out fires.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Once you have a problem....you fix it.

There is no looking ahead IMO.

The FAA and this Administration are simply putting out fires.Agreed. The only thing worse would be to have an appeaser administration that would be lead by any dim candidate you can think of. Bush, for all his security mistakes and short-sightedness, at least understands we are at war.

[SicEmBaylor]

His new book pointing out how truly dangerous the unchecked illegal immigration is to the survival of our country moves him out of my personal dog house. It has also become a best-seller, which should tell politicians of both parties what the public sentiment is for the invasion by illegals.

WF, meet a real conservative. Mr. Buchanan, meet WF.

[VeeJay]

Pat's never trailed along with the tail waggers.

He broke away from Bush 41 and ran against him, and Clinton kicked Bush out of the WH any way. Buchanan saw Bush's turning his back on the Reagan legacy for what it was.

He has a problem with an alleged conservative being anything but. I've always pretty much agreed with Pat, and stopped watching "Crossfire" when he left.

[SoonerProphet]

He is the best commentator on The McLaughlin Group. Heads and shoulders above Eleanor Clift and Tony Blankley.

[OklahomaTuba]

I agree, he's damn good. Just don't agree with his isolationist/appeasment view of the world.

But he is right on about the re-conquista movement. Sounds like he took a page right out of the book by Victor Davis Hanson.

http://www.victorhanson.com/MexiforniaAd.jpg

[IB4OU2]

Once you have a problem....you fix it.

There is no looking ahead IMO.

The FAA and this Administration are simply putting out fires.

Reactionary vs Pro-active.....I agree.

[tbl]

I think carry-on luggage should be banned on all Commercial Aircraft.

I take it you don't travel for business that often???

If they ever do that, it will be the suck of all sucks. :mad:

[Okla-homey]

Pat makes some good points, much of them based on historical facts about the fall of empires.

Unfortunately, he doesn't propose mining in addition to fencing the principle illegal border crossing corridors. Obstacles without mines are next to worthless as any combat engineer can tell you. Why spend bajillions on a very expensive wall system when mines and a couple lines of concertina razor wire would do it?

Nice mixed anti-personnel and anti-vehicle fields of varying densities extending out about two clicks south of the wire should do it. We could use the mostly plastic ones which defy detection by metal detectors. They could be replenished as needed. In addition, aerial insertion of mine fields would be possible in areas which get rapidly depleted by repeated detonations.

I bet after a month or two and a couple thousand folks got assploded, the flow of illegals would slow to a manageable trickle.;)

[OklahomaTuba]

So would my steady supply of cheap boos and drugs.

[tbl]

He has a problem with an alleged conservative being anything but.
That's why I don't understand the unwavering support for Bush by true conservatives. The guy has caved countless times an only recently veto'd his first spending bill. Other than that, he's signed in every spending bill that's crossed his desk. Typically, it's the job of conservatives to balance the budget, not spend more than your democratic predecessor.

[OklahomaTuba]

That's why I don't understand the unwavering support for Bush by true conservatives. The guy has caved countless times an only recently veto'd his first spending bill. Other than that, he's signed in every spending bill that's crossed his desk. Typically, it's the job of conservatives to balance the budget, not spend more than your democratic predecessor.
Its not really unwavering support for all things he does, its just the alternatives were so bad (Kerry) and the fact we are at war. Those two thing trump all else at the moment.

Spending, immigration and a really hard line on Iran need to be addressed soon though, if the GOP intends on having the conservative base participate in the midterms.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Its not really unwavering support for all things he does, its just the alternatives were so bad (Kerry) and the fact we are at war. Those two thing trump all else at the moment.

Spending, immigration and a really hard line on Iran need to be addressed soon though, if the GOP intends on having the conservative base participate in the midterms.Hopefully, people will seriously contemplate what the governance of this country will be like if the dims do get back into the majority.

[FaninAma]

I was actually a delegate for Pat Buchanon in his Presidential run against Dole. I think he lost some credibility when he started waxing philosophically on the, in his opinion, "unneeded" war against the Nazi's in WWII.

That's where he really delved into an area that allowed his critics to tar and feather him as an anti-Semite and racist.

[VeeJay]

That's why I don't understand the unwavering support for Bush by true conservatives. The guy has caved countless times an only recently veto'd his first spending bill. Other than that, he's signed in every spending bill that's crossed his desk. Typically, it's the job of conservatives to balance the budget, not spend more than your democratic predecessor.

I don't believe it's unwavering support - at least not any more. His numbers are in the tank, and a lot more than 33% voted for him in '04.

The series of snafus starting in '05 after Katrina, chipped way - he couldn't seem to get any of it right domestically or internationally. Harriet Meyers - I mean, WTF was that all about?

Katrina? Not his fault. Goddammit, people want government to work, regardless who the president is. We don't want silly turf wars between federal agencies and we don't want the major port's operations sold to foreign interests with suspicious ties - all under a cloak of secrecy. There's a big time disconnect with this Bush regime and the people that elected him to serve. [rant over]

biglebowski - I'm actually agreeing with you 100% there!

[FaninAma]

Homey, I think it could be done by putting some teeth into the penalties for employers who don't make a sincere effort to not hire illegals and by taking away any social benefits for illegals like free education and health care.

Yes, it seems callous and out of line with our tradition of helping those in need but the Founding Fathers were the earliest to recognize the threat to this country was not from an invading army but from insecure borders and the watering down of the value of citizenship in this country.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I don't believe it's unwavering support - at least not any more. His numbers are in the tank, and a lot more than 33% voted for him in '04.

The series of snafus starting in '05 after Katrina, chipped way - he couldn't seem to get any of it right domestically or internationally. Harriet Meyers - I mean, WTF was that all about?

Katrina? Not his fault. Goddammit, people want government to work, regardless who the president is. We don't want silly turf wars between federal agencies and we don't want the major port's operations sold to foreign interests with suspicious ties - all under a cloak of secrecy. There's a big time disconnect with this Bush regime and the people that elected him to serve. [rant over]

biglebowski - I'm actually agreeing with you 100% there!So, is he so bad, IYO, that we need to have the Keystone Cops(aka democrats) running the show?

[VeeJay]

So, is he so bad, IYO, that we need to have the Keystone Cops(aka democrats) running the show?

Negative, Commander.

I am just saying that the Repubs have control of both houses of Congress, yet they were seemingly more effective under the Clinton presidency.

Summary: There has been a huge opportunity missed to accomplish some very good things for this country. An opportunity we probably won't see again for a long time.

[tbl]

I do agree that it's better than if the dems were in control... but come on W. Try to go out with a bang.

[Okla-homey]

Homey, I think it could be done by putting some teeth into the penalties for employers who don't make a sincere effort to not hire illegals and by taking away any social benefits for illegals like free education and health care.



I respectfully disagree. The folks who are here aren't leaving no matter what we do. We aren't going to build concentration camps and we're not gonna deny their kids education and healthcare because its not the kids' fault they're here illegally -- and many are born here and are therefore citizens with the same rights as you and me.

Ergo, the only way to staunch this arterial wound to our nationality is to block new sneaker-inners AND make it too hard for folks who are here illegally to run down to visit mama y abuelo in the old country at Navidad and return to their jobs after New Years with three cousins in tow.

[handcrafted]

I do agree that it's better than if the dems were in control... but come on W. Try to go out with a bang.

I think Clinton managed that one. :D

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

So, giddy-up, go, all you hesitant politicians. Cracking down would only bring you more votes.

[handcrafted]

No unwavering support here. I'm embarassed by both Bush 41 and 43, because in their desire to be all things to all people they have lost the true meaning of being a conservative (if they ever had it in the first place).

I've always liked Pat except for his isolationism and opposition to free trade. I could never wrap my brain around his arguments.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

No unwavering support here. I'm embarassed by both Bush 41 and 43, because in their desire to be all things to all people they have lost the true meaning of being a conservative (if they ever had it in the first place).

I've always liked Pat except for his isolationism and opposition to free trade. I could never wrap my brain around his arguments.BEAUTY!

[OklahomaTuba]

RUDY, RUDY, RUDY, RUDY,...

;)

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

RUDY, RUDY, RUDY, RUDY,...

;)yes, our "maverick" senator looks less likely, and less palatable, ALL THE TIME.

[SicEmBaylor]

Allow me to ask a question to "conservatuve" Rudy supporters.
Is domestic policy at all a concern or are you strictly foreign policy voters?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Allow me to ask a question to "conservatuve" Rudy supporters.
Is domestic policy at all a concern or are you strictly foreign policy voters?I think we're looking for someone who is playing with a full deck, and who understands the Islamist threat. Security of the poplace has to be #1. My favorite of those likely to run wold be George Allen, but he might have Dan Quayle'd himself with the supposed racist comment. Who's left...McCain?

[OklahomaTuba]

Allow me to ask a question to "conservatuve" Rudy supporters.
Is domestic policy at all a concern or are you strictly foreign policy voters?

And to the confederate "conservative", I would answer this:
As long as we are in a war, then national security matters is what my vote is going to be based on. Domestic policy won't matter much to me if we are getting slaughtered by nutso jihadists.

[SicEmBaylor]

And to the confederate "conservative", I would answer this:
As long as we are in a war, then national security matters is what my vote is going to be based on. Domestic policy won't matter much to me if we are getting slaughtered by nutso jihadists.

You are seriously seriously inflating the threat they pose. I can't blame you at all for being as scared as you are since the Bush Administration's #1 tactic is fear mongering and making people believe we're just hair away from impending doom. Radical islam is a threat to be sure, but do you really think they have the capability to slaughter every American in their sleep if we let up for one minute? We're not confronting the Soviet Union here, we're confronting a radical religous movement that takes several years to plan and execute a major attack. As horrific as 9/11 was, and God knows I'm not denying that fact, it resulted in about 4,000 casulties. To put that into perspective, in 2002 a year after 9/11 there were about 44k car related deaths in these United States; there were 30k+ deaths related to firearms; and, there were many times those number in random mishaps and accidents.

China, on the other hand, has the ability to kill many times the number of Americans in a matter of a few hours than terrorists could if given a century to do it. My point here isn't to say that terrorism isn't a threat; those who perpetuate acts against these United States must be dealt with decisively. I don't believe that the way to do that is some sort of neocon utopian vision to restructure the mid-east into a peaceful and democratic civilization. It's a serious error in judgement to lose sight of real, and potentially far more dangerous, threats to our nation for trying to combat a tactic (terrorism) that can never truly be defeated.

I also think it's a serious mistake to lose sight and political interest in our most cherished values at home for the sake of seeing that futile attempt come to fruitation abroad. I want our troops to be successful, but I want them to eventually come home to find a nation that retains the values they were suppose to be fighting for in the first place.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

OK, then, Hillary/Slick is your team. The impeached one will pal up to the ChiComs again, and we'll all sing kumbaya, well into the nuclear winter.

[FaninAma]

No unwavering support here. I'm embarassed by both Bush 41 and 43, because in their desire to be all things to all people they have lost the true meaning of being a conservative (if they ever had it in the first place).

I've always liked Pat except for his isolationism and opposition to free trade. I could never wrap my brain around his arguments.

I liked him for his opposition to free trade agreements. Anything that hurts Wal-Mart is okie-dokie with me. I didn't agree with his isolationist positions.

Remember how scorn and criticism were heaped upon Buchanan for his anti-illegal immigration stance? Now we find out that muslims are being smuggled over the US-Mexico border in untold numbers.

[Scott D]

Today I'm as sure as ever that william favor lives in kookyfantasyland.

For those of you so anti-isolationalist, I'm curious as to why?

[critical_phil]

Domestic policy won't matter much to me if we are getting slaughtered by nutso jihadists.


of all the dumb things you've ever posted, this is the goddamned dumbest.

[SicEmBaylor]

of all the dumb things you've ever posted, this is the goddamned dumbest.

I thought precisely the same thing, but you said it much better. Spek.

[SicEmBaylor]

OK, then, Hillary/Slick is your team. The impeached one will pal up to the ChiComs again, and we'll all sing kumbaya, well into the nuclear winter.

I don't exactly get your point since I'm warning against taking our eyes off nation-states with the capability to do us more harm than terrorists ever could.

[OklahomaTuba]

of all the dumb things you've ever posted, this is the goddamned dumbest.
Whys that?

I guess you havn't been paying attention to the news for about the last 5 years?

[OklahomaTuba]

I thought precisely the same thing, but you said it much better. Spek.
Interesting that you think its stupid that national security is issue #1 during a war. Very telling indeed. Considering its what won Bush the last election, you may want to re-think how stupid it was.

[SicEmBaylor]

Whys that?

FDR seemed to agree with this during WW2, considering his domestic policy included forcing lots of innocent people into camps.

....And haven't conservatives been bitching about the centralization/de-federalization of national policy every since...well until your neocon buddies start peddling their snake oil under the GOP tent?

I don't exactly know what point you're even making by this. FDR was wrong and did it so it's okay for a Republican to do it now? And please, the threat we face from terrorism isn't a 1/10 of the threat we or the world faced from the Axis.

[SicEmBaylor]

Interesting that you think its stupid that national security is issue #1 during a war. Very telling indeed. Considering its what won Bush the last election, you may want to re-think how stupid it was.

I didn't say that focusing on foreign policy was a stupid campaign tactic, I agreed that your statement that domestic policy doesn't seem to matter was stupid.

[OklahomaTuba]

And please, the threat we face from terrorism isn't a 1/10 of the threat we or the world faced from the Axis.

Well, not until they get their hands on a nuke/dirty bomb and sneak it into your frienldy local American metropolis, power plant, refinery, etc.

Or better yet, if they **** with the global supply of petroleum, sending our nation into economic freefall.

Last I checked, the axis powers never launched a successful attack on civlian targets in NYC & DC killing thousands of innocent people.

[OklahomaTuba]

I didn't say that focusing on foreign policy was a stupid campaign tactic, I agreed that your statement that domestic policy doesn't seem to matter was stupid.

It matters, but is hardly the #1 or #2 priority we need in a leader right now when we are fighting a war. The last few elections are proof of this, and the next few will be as well.

But please, go ahead and keep you head in the sand, that way you can dream in peace of the day when we finally bring back the articles of confederation, isolate ourselves from the rest of the world and just fade away into history.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

His new book pointing out how truly dangerous the unchecked illegal immigration is to the survival of our country moves him out of my personal dog house. It has also become a best-seller, which should tell politicians of both parties what the public sentiment is for the invasion by illegals.

Michael Moore was a best seller, as woudl Cindy Sheehan if she wrote a book..honestly Best-Seller isn't an indicator of public sentiment..if that was true, since Paris Hilton was a best seller...we all endorse whores! However, saying Illegal immmigration needs to be fixed is about as bold as me saying if I don't eat I will eventually die.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

You are seriously seriously inflating the threat they pose. I can't blame you at all for being as scared as you are since the Bush Administration's #1 tactic is fear mongering and making people believe we're just hair away from impending doom.



http://www.symphonyspace.org/releases/photos/117/stephen_colbert_bloom3.jpgWhy do you hate America :(

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Today I'm as sure as ever that william favor lives in kookyfantasyland.

Coming from you, that's a compliment.

[badger]

remember when the butterfly ballot ruined Al Gore's campaign in Florida?

Pat Buchanan had more votes there... but was the only candidate to run on the "protect the border" platform.

The 2000 election--- six years ago, the crazy presidential candidate. It was HIS platform before it was anyone else's.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I don't exactly get your point since I'm warning against taking our eyes off nation-states with the capability to do us more harm than terrorists ever could.My point is, who the heck do you choose as our fearless leader?Are you implying that Giuliani wouldn't think to observe and react to nation-states?

[Scott D]

For those of you so anti-isolationalist, I'm curious as to why?

I'm still waiting.....

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I'm still waiting.....First please give us all the glorious reasons why we should WANT to be isolationists.

[SicEmBaylor]

My point is, who the heck do you choose as our fearless leader?Are you implying that Giuliani wouldn't think to observe and react to nation-states?

I'm not implying anything of the sort. I have no doubt Rudy would do what needs to be done to protect this nation from any threat no matter what that threat is. But, I'm not going to vote for Rudy at the expense of domestic policy. Domestic is as important to me as Foreign policy if not slightly more so.

[FaninAma]

Sic'Em, I think you're trivializing the threat to this country presented by the single-minded hatred the Islamist have for us. The fear is not in the number of US citizens they might kill, although a tactical suitcase nuke in NYC might do some serious damage, but rather the damage they can do to our economy.

The big blow from 9-11 wasn't the loss of the Twin Towers or even the 3000 lives of US and other world citizens that were lost, as tragic as it was. The big blow was the billions, if not trillions, of dollars in economic loss suffered as the confidence in the US' and the West's security as a safe haven for investors was shaken to the core. Add to this the devestation suffered by the airline industry...the ripple effect of which is still being felt and surely you can see the potential for damage from a terrorist attack that could devestate our economy while only costing a relatively few lives in comparison to the American lives lost in WWII.

And I haven't even mentioned the damage 9-11 and the threat of future attacks have done to our open, freedom-loving society.

[SicEmBaylor]

Sic'Em, I think you're trivializing the threat to this country presented by the single-minded hatred the Islamist have for us. The fear is not in the number of US citizens they might kill, although a tactical suitcase nuke in NYC might do some serious damage, but rather the damage they can do to our economy.

The big blow from 9-11 wasn't the loss of the Twin Towers or even the 3000 lives of US and other world citizens that were lost, as tragic as it was. The big blow was the billions, if not trillions, of dollars in economic loss suffered as the confidence in the US' and the West's security as a safe haven for investors was shaken to the core. Add to this the devestation suffered by the airline industry...the ripple effect of which is still being felt and surely you can see the potential for damage from a terrorist attack that could devestate our economy while only costing a relatively few lives in comparison to the American lives lost in WWII.

And I haven't even mentioned the damage 9-11 and the threat of future attacks have done to our open, freedom-loving society.

I'm not trivializing or implying in anyway that we should ignore the threat and do nothing about radical islamic terrorists who want to bring us harm in any form. Quite the contrary, I fully support dealing with them swifty and decisively. What I don't fully support is restructuring our military to fight a "tactic" that can never be defeated and attempting to moderate the religion of more than a billion people. I think it's ultimately self-defeating.

[SicEmBaylor]

First please give us all the glorious reasons why we should WANT to be isolationists.

A)A strong powerful government projecting its power abroad in a never-ending war is not conducive to limited and small government at home.

[SoonerProphet]

A)A strong powerful government projecting its power abroad in a never-ending war is not conducive to limited and small government at home.

Bingo, no difference between welfare statism and warfare statism, imo.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Bingo, no difference between welfare statism and warfare statism, imo.With the foundation of your argument being that the Iraq war is unwinnable...or that it's just not right to be there?

[SicEmBaylor]

With the foundation of your argument being that the Iraq war is unwinnable...or that it's just not right to be there?

Well, I don't want to speak for him, but I can speak for myself. In my case, it's totally the former. The war is ultimately unwinnable. We had a right to be there. We have a right to go anywhere we think we need to go in order to defend ourselves, but that doesn't mean that it's always a good option.

[Okla-homey]

Well, I don't want to speak for him, but I can speak for myself. In my case, it's totally the former. The war is ultimately unwinnable. We had a right to be there. We have a right to go anywhere we think we need to go in order to defend ourselves, but that doesn't mean that it's always a good option.

Here's another little gem from history. All of recorded history in fact. A war becomes unwinnable when a nation's will is broken.

There was once a great western statesman from a tiny island country with no natural resources except the guts of its people. That man encouraged his people to "bear any burden, pay any price" to ensure their national survival. I consider him a great man and a genius.

Frankly, I'm not willing to cave on the notion we can't win this thing...especially since we still hold the megaton "aces."

Its simple really. Despite what a lot of so-called smart folks would have you believe-- its really a simple matter of us or the jihaadis. If we lose our stomach for this fight, they will be so emboldened by our lack of resolve that they will come at us from a thousand new directions.

Frankly, I admire Ronaldus Maximus (Peace be upon him) greatly and thus it pains me to say this, but he screwed-the-pooch when he pulled us out of Lebanon after the Marine Barracks bombing. That fact, combined with Clinton's reaction to the Mogadishu tragedy are both precisely why the jihaadis are still at it. They are banking on the fact that we'll pack-up and leave Iraq to them if they keep bleeding us. They won't stop there either. Their stated goal is the destruction of the West. That is not hyperbole, its fact.

Recent history going all the way back to Viet Nam is a testament to the fact we like our wars "thin and crispy." Further, it is an undisputed fact that Saddam made "Blackhawk Down" required viewing for his general staff.

Folks, I'm telling ya. Its time to draw a line in the sand and put the world on notice "this far and no further." The alternative is merely to postpone the inevitable and ensure baby boys who are now suc(k)ing on OU pacifiers will have to fight jihaadis.

That's all i have to say about that.

[SicEmBaylor]

Here's another little gem from history. All of recorded history in fact. A war becomes unwinnable when a nation's will is broken.

There was once a great western statesman from a tiny island country with no natural resources except the guts of its people. That man encouraged his people to "bear any burden, pay any price" to ensure their national survival. I consider him a great man and a genius.

Frankly, I'm not willing to cave on the notion we can't win this thing...especially since we still hold the megaton "aces."

Its simple really. Despite what a lot of so-called smart folks would have you believe-- its really a simple matter of us or the jihaadis. If we lose our stomach for this fight, they will be so emboldened by our lack of resolve that they will come at us from a thousand new directions.

Frankly, I admire Ronaldus Maximus (Peace be upon him) greatly and thus it pains me to say this, but he screwed-the-pooch when he pulled us out of Lebanon after the Marine Barracks bombing. That fact, combined with Clinton's reaction to the Mogadishu tragedy are both precisely why the jihaadis are still at it. They are banking on the fact that we'll pack-up and leave Iraq to them if they keep bleeding us. They won't stop there either. Their stated goal is the destruction of the West. That is not hyperbole, its fact.

Recent history going all the way back to Viet Nam is a testament to the fact we like our wars "thin and crispy." Further, it is an undisputed fact that Saddam made "Blackhawk Down" required viewing for his general staff.

Folks, I'm telling ya. Its time to draw a line in the sand and put the world on notice "this far and no further." The alternative is merely to postpone the inevitable and ensure baby boys who are now suc(k)ing on OU pacifiers will have to fight jihaadis.

That's all i have to say about that.

But, they weren't jihadists in Iraq. There are plenty of htem there now and you can definitely make the case that killing them there rather than here is a good idea. But Iraq was not a radical fundamentalist country, and I think that given the dangers of radical islam and the threat posed by Iran that leaving Saddam in place to deal with the radical elements in his own country and provide a counter-weight to Iran may have been a better course of action.

[Okla-homey]

But, they weren't jihadists in Iraq. There are plenty of htem there now and you can definitely make the case that killing them there rather than here is a good idea. But Iraq was not a radical fundamentalist country, and I think that given the dangers of radical islam and the threat posed by Iran that leaving Saddam in place to deal with the radical elements in his own country and provide a counter-weight to Iran may have been a better course of action.

A more reliable counter-weight IMHO.

http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/9351/wwwwwdoseratelq6.gif (http://imageshack.us)

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Here's another little gem from history. All of recorded history in fact. A war becomes unwinnable when a nation's will is broken.

There was once a great western statesman from a tiny island country with no natural resources except the guts of its people. That man encouraged his people to "bear any burden, pay any price" to ensure their national survival. I consider him a great man and a genius.

Frankly, I'm not willing to cave on the notion we can't win this thing...especially since we still hold the megaton "aces."

Its simple really. Despite what a lot of so-called smart folks would have you believe-- its really a simple matter of us or the jihaadis. If we lose our stomach for this fight, they will be so emboldened by our lack of resolve that they will come at us from a thousand new directions.

Frankly, I admire Ronaldus Maximus (Peace be upon him) greatly and thus it pains me to say this, but he screwed-the-pooch when he pulled us out of Lebanon after the Marine Barracks bombing. That fact, combined with Clinton's reaction to the Mogadishu tragedy are both precisely why the jihaadis are still at it. They are banking on the fact that we'll pack-up and leave Iraq to them if they keep bleeding us. They won't stop there either. Their stated goal is the destruction of the West. That is not hyperbole, its fact.

Recent history going all the way back to Viet Nam is a testament to the fact we like our wars "thin and crispy." Further, it is an undisputed fact that Saddam made "Blackhawk Down" required viewing for his general staff.

Folks, I'm telling ya. Its time to draw a line in the sand and put the world on notice "this far and no further." The alternative is merely to postpone the inevitable and ensure baby boys who are now suc(k)ing on OU pacifiers will have to fight jihaadis.

That's all i have to say about that.You say you're a lawyer, but how CAN you be when you don't act like one. You are far too logical AND patriotic to be a lawyer. You are a black mark on your profession.:mad:

[Scott D]

A more reliable counter-weight IMHO.

http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/9351/wwwwwdoseratelq6.gif (http://imageshack.us)

that is never a more reliable counter-weight.

[Pricetag]

Homey, would you mind describing how we'd use nuclear weapons to win this war?

[Okla-homey]

Homey, would you mind describing how we'd use nuclear weapons to win this war?

Damascus, Tehran. Done.;)

[OklahomaTuba]

The war is ultimately unwinnable. We had a right to be there.
Now THAT is the dumbest post I have ever read.

Its that kind of attitude that is going to send our troops packing like in Vietnam, only this time Charlie will be following us home.

[OklahomaTuba]

Domestic is as important to me as Foreign policy if not slightly more so.

This issue isn't about Foreign policy, its about National Security.

ALL policies depend on our National Security, domestic included.

[Pricetag]

Damascus, Tehran. Done.;)
Heh. I'm on board with the whole mining the boarders stuff. I hate the idea of it, but in the end, it's the only way we could shut them down in a cost effective manner.

I hate the idea of using nukes even more, but I don't think they'd be effective, either. Anyone left alive would be left with a healthy hatred of us, and that isn't even considering the folks from the surrounding countries who weren't even hit but would feel the consequences.

[OklahomaTuba]

I'm still waiting.....
Why am I anti-isolationist?

Maybe cause our entire economy and way of life depends on us NOT being isolationist cheese eating surrender monkeys, as bear boy would rather have us be.

;)

[SicEmBaylor]

Now THAT is the dumbest post I have ever read.

Its that kind of attitude that is going to send our troops packing like in Vietnam, only this time Charlie will be following us home.

What is the ultimate goal of the war? To just bring democracy to Iraq? That in and of itself was not worth going to war over. It becomes plausibly justified if bringing democracy to Iraq reduces the overall threat of islamic terrorism. It won't. When I say the war is unwinnable I'm talking about the goal of democratizing the region and moderating Islam.

Furthermore, terrorism is a tactic and can never and will never be defeated. When any group is determined to use force to further their cause and lack the support of a conventional army then they'll always resort to terrorist/guerilla tactics.

Islamic terrorism can not be defeated without trying to wipe out Islam itself.

[Okla-homey]

Islamic terrorism can not be defeated without trying to wipe out Islam itself.

ding-ding-ding

We have a winnah!

Seriously, we need to equate jihaadism with certain, violent death. With lots of collateral damage .

Just my opinion mind you, but when "Durka Mama's" figger out that jihadd = death every single time...this crap will settle down. IOW, my hope is placed in "the hand that rocks the cradle."

They may wear burkas but they control the hoo-hoo supply which is incredibly empowering.

I myself, although I am the among the manliest of men and extemly confident in the rightness of my opinions, wilt before the power that is the poo-nanny.

[royalfan5]

ding-ding-ding

We have a winnah!

Seriously, we need to equate jihaadism with certain, violent death. With lots of collateral damage .

Just my opinion mind you, but when "Durka Mama's" figger out that jihadd = death every single time...this crap will settle down. IOW, my hope is placed in "the hand that rocks the cradle."

They may wear burkas but they control the hoo-hoo supply which is incredibly empowering.

I myself, although I am the among the manliest of men and extemly confident in the rightness of my opinions, wilt before the power that is the poo-nanny.
The problem with that strategy imo, is that you can't depend on a mostly illitrate ill-formed populace to be able to form rational conclusions like your proposing. I think we will know that we are getting close to victory when the terrorist shift from suicide bombings to regular because they are having trouble getting new recruits. That will happen when they don't believe that blowing your self is all that great of an idea. I think that will either come from an ideaological reformation with in Islam, an Arab Martin Luther if you will, or from Islamists sensing that they have a chance for personal prosperity on their own. I am a firm believer in the idea that economic freedom is that foundation for personal freedom. The Islamic states that cause most of the problem have massive state sectors, and the resulting economic problems that result from that. Being poor ****es people off, and that rage is easy to channel towards a great Satan by Mullah's who know if they can't find a scapegoat, that rage will turn on them. Things will change when Joe Iranian realizes that the Ayatollah has no clothes. Honestly, I think if events were to knock out Iranian oil production because of their own actions, their economy would go poof in a real hurry, and when Joe Iranian sees that this "victory" over the great Satan doesn't produce positive change for them, the Clerics are going to have some explaining to do, because after all you can't drink the oil.

[critical_phil]

They may wear burkas but they control the hoo-hoo supply which is incredibly empowering.

I myself, although I am the among the manliest of men and extemly confident in the rightness of my opinions, wilt before the power that is the poo-nanny.


so we should carpet bomb the middle east with copies of Lysistrata?

[OklahomaTuba]

What is the ultimate goal of the war? To just bring democracy to Iraq? That in and of itself was not worth going to war over. The goal was to disarm a terror supporting state that was in violation of a ceasefire with us. Installing a democratic government was simply the thing we had to do, but it was hardly the reason we went to war. You of all people should know this.


It becomes plausibly justified if bringing democracy to Iraq reduces the overall threat of islamic terrorism. It won't. When I say the war is unwinnable I'm talking about the goal of democratizing the region and moderating Islam.

Furthermore, terrorism is a tactic and can never and will never be defeated. When any group is determined to use force to further their cause and lack the support of a conventional army then they'll always resort to terrorist/guerilla tactics.

Islamic terrorism can not be defeated without trying to wipe out Islam itself.
I disagree completly that the GWOT is unwinnable. I do agree its name is wrong, but islamic terrorism is a tactic used by specific groups supported by specific states and people, so that is who you go after, like the Taliban, AQ and Saddam. Iran, Syria and Hezbollah will be next IMO.

[OklahomaTuba]

The problem with that strategy imo, is that you can't depend on a mostly illitrate ill-formed populace to be able to form rational conclusions like your proposing. I think we will know that we are getting close to victory when the terrorist shift from suicide bombings to regular because they are having trouble getting new recruits. That will happen when they don't believe that blowing your self is all that great of an idea. I think that will either come from an ideaological reformation with in Islam, an Arab Martin Luther if you will, or from Islamists sensing that they have a chance for personal prosperity on their own. I am a firm believer in the idea that economic freedom is that foundation for personal freedom. The Islamic states that cause most of the problem have massive state sectors, and the resulting economic problems that result from that. Being poor ****es people off, and that rage is easy to channel towards a great Satan by Mullah's who know if they can't find a scapegoat, that rage will turn on them. Things will change when Joe Iranian realizes that the Ayatollah has no clothes. Honestly, I think if events were to knock out Iranian oil production because of their own actions, their economy would go poof in a real hurry, and when Joe Iranian sees that this "victory" over the great Satan doesn't produce positive change for them, the Clerics are going to have some explaining to do, because after all you can't drink the oil.


We would do ourselves a huge favor by putting as much government money into alternative energy research as possible. Cause if oil isn't as high, then most of our enemies aren't that big of a deal anymore.

That is something I don't like about Bush. They havn't done enough on that front.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

We would do ourselves a huge favor by putting as much government money into alternative energy research as possible. Cause if oil isn't as high, then most of our enemies aren't that big of a deal anymore.

That is something I don't like about Bush. They havn't done enough on that front.Tuba, I gotta believe lots of people are looking at the whole spectrum of possibilities. If there's incredible wealth to be made by finding the next economically viabale source of energy, and there certainly would be, then great efforts are currently being made to do so. The key is it has to make sense economically.

[royalfan5]

We would do ourselves a huge favor by putting as much government money into alternative energy research as possible. Cause if oil isn't as high, then most of our enemies aren't that big of a deal anymore.

That is something I don't like about Bush. They havn't done enough on that front.
I agree, I don't think America understands that they can't just drill more, or be more fuel efficent, or develop more renewable energy, it has to be all of the above. There isn't one silver bullet but a whole chamber we need to use.

[Scott D]

We would do ourselves a huge favor by putting as much government money into alternative energy research as possible. Cause if oil isn't as high, then most of our enemies aren't that big of a deal anymore.

That is something I don't like about Bush. They havn't done enough on that front.

I don't have enough faith in our government or our society to ever think that will come about in due time. They'll charactaristically wait until it's too late before taking it seriously.