Watching republican debates on FOX
Ron Paul: republican party is threatening to Iran and Pakistan
Wait a second was it OBAMA who was going to attack Pakistan? Name me one republican who did advocate this idea
It does not matter what you think about Newt Gingrich but he definitely can make a point. He made few appearances recently and did few keen remarks. But most interesting ones were on the FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace” , July 29, 2007 he formulated what I think absolute and only true : neither republicans nor democrats have a vision of enormous problems we are faced with: “the Republicans don’t recognize the scale of the performance failure of government as a system, and the Democrats are living in a fantasy land in terms of their policy proposals.”(fox news)
Why I am choosing republicans today? Because I do not want to be associated with those democrats who, as Gingrich said, are “deeply opposed to American victory and deeply committed to American defeat.” (fox news)
I always was thinking that there is not anti war movement today only anti-victory . it looks like democrats are rushing to quit before we really can win, just ” punish” republicans for starting the war. You cannot say better than Gingrich: “We are faced with evil opponents. Those opponents need to be defeated. And if General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker come back in September and say, “We actually can win this thing,” I want to understand the rationale that says, “No, we don’t want to let America win. Let’s legislate defeat for the United States.” (fox news)
It is not between doves and hawks anymore . People who want to end the war by withdrawal are not doves because the are not for piece. They are for defeat. By surrendering or by “legislating defeat” as Gingrich named it they are not going to save any lives by quitting. As Gingrich said
“What I would say to any Democrat who wants America to leave is quite simple. Millions of Iraqis have sided with the United States. They are known in their neighborhoods. They are known in their cities. If we abandon them, they are going to be massacred.” (fox news)
Another Cambodia is coming to mind. So those “doves” who by pro-peace (meaning anti-victory) demagoguery are imposing on us unavoidable casualties are really vultures, not doves .
Filed under 2008 vote, 2008 voter, Analysis, anti-war, Gingrich, GOP, Iraq, Iraq war, Islam, Islamo fascism, Jihad, middle east, Newt Gingrich, war, withdrawal
“This is political suicide for them, the majority of America doesn’t
support or read Daily Kos… they are a hateful far left website.
Even the majority of left wingers will be turned off by this. Unless
they change their minds about this, this is going to hurt them long
term I would think. ?”
Filed under 2008 vote, 2008 voter, Analysis, anti-Semitism, anti-war, daily kos, democrats, Dodd, fox, GOP, Liebermann, O'Reilly, politic, Republicans
Democrats are calling for withdraw of troops. Democrats are OK with defeat in Iraq because the military defeat of the USA in Iraq means a political defeat of Bush, and, by proxy, defeat of GOP. So, military defeat of USA in Iraq will be a political victory for Democrats. Democrats have capitalized on anti-war sentiment in 2006, and they are going to bet on anti-war mood and general apathy of public during 2008 campaign. I do not blame Democrats for using anti-war demagoguery as a main tool in 2008 elections. After all, they have nothing else what separates them from GOP. They are similarly corrupted. And similarly incapable to achieve anything in Congress. So Democrats rely solemnly on ending the war and on winning political power by ending the war. It is exactly what Lenin and Bolsheviks did during WWI: he used the national tragedy as an instrument of grabbing the power.
Filed under Analysis, anti-war, Bolsheviks, Bush, GOP, Iraq, Lenin, Leninism, middle east, politic, Republicans, USA, war, withdrawal
I do not trust anti-war people. I am sure that their goal is political demagoguery.
If they are real anti-violence dedicated citizens, why nobody demonstrates against mass killings by terrorists ?
Can anybody refer me to at least one recent anti-terrorist demonstration? Does anybody know about at least one action by anti-war crowd, pacifists and other “anti-violence” talkers against suicide bombing and car bombing maniacs?
I challenge those who are calling us to stop “violence in Iraq” to explain why it is OK to ignore deliberate mass killings by terrorists and in the same time use casualties and violence as a “moral” excuse for accepting a defeat by withdrawal?
If they are anti-violence, why do they not think about those Iraqis who will be killed for sure if/when we leave? According to all experts there will be more casualties if we leave! So, if they really care about Iraqis, you should be for us staying there. Anyway, it cannot be both ways: crying for Iraqi casualties from suicide bombs and in the same time by damning them to even worse casualties.
These “anti-war” people are not “anti-violence” in general, they are “anti-violence by USA.”
This leads to at least three conclusions:
So if we will withdraw for the sake of stopping violence it will be anti-American, pro-terrorist action encouraging further violence.
Prove me wrong
Filed under Analysis, anti-war, Iraq, middle east, politic, United States, USA, violence, war, withdrawal