Ron Paul : none of Arab nations wanted Saddam Hussein in Kuwait: Ron you either ignorant or demagogue or both . Palestinians , presented by PLO “Palestine Liberation Organization” and personally by Arafat endorsed Saddam’s invasion in Kuwait
Happy thanksgiving to our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan!
Thank you for making our holidays safe!
If you read this posting , take a minute and send your text message to our heroes.
“During this week of Thanksgiving, let our troops know we’re thinking about them through the Pentagon’s America Supports You program…You can send your message of thanks by texting to 89279.” read more about that on www.americasupportsyou.mil
thank you to all our vets, first of all , today vets from the Iraq and Afghanistan . Happy Veterans Day!
Listening to Barack Obama’s recent speech in Manchester New Hampshire (CSPN-2) :
Incredibly populist speech. He can beat even Edwards with his blatant populism.
If I will have time I will go point by point: education, healthcare , global warming; all accessories of populism are in place. Nothing really new in this populist talk.
History knows only two forms of implementation of populism: communism and fascism. Those who like populism have to choose on those above because there are no other historical options available.
Let me focus only on his favorite aspect : anti war ( or to be precise pro-defeat) position. His anti-war vote is essentially only thing that separates him from Clinton who is essentially same populist position in terms of universal healthcare and feeding money to educational system.
So let us see what Obama is saying about the war:
” undo the war” slogan
He reminds us again and again that he was one who was against the war.
You were against war? OK! Let us for the sake of argument accept that you were right then. It does not mean that you are right now. Things changed between then and now. You cannot stay in the past .You have to adjust your political mind to new reality. You do not like this reality? So do I. But if you do not like a reality it does not mean that you can ignore a reality: there is no “UNDO” button on “ political computer”. You were against the war it does not mean that you can “undo“ that war. And this is what Obama essentially is saying: “I was against the war then , war was wrong then , and if you will elect me I will end the war ( read “ I will capitulate”)”.
He presumes, for some reason, that after he will surrender everything will be like it was before the war. He presumes that the war will be undone by electing him as a president. Very misleading and deceitful message.
price of withdrawal: misleading out of the war versus misleading in the war
If Obama indeed is honest as he claims (the main message of Obama’s is that he is honest outsider unlike other candidates who are dishonest insiders ) he has to talk right now with his constituency about price of withdrawal which will be huge. But he is not talking about price of capitulation, he is talking only about how correct he was back then when he was against the war. ( his glorious moment as he thinks)
He either does not understand what he is talking about or he is disingenuous in order to just to be elected. Why he his not talking with constituency about the price of withdrawal ( capitulation)? He is saying that if he is a president he will talk honestly about problems. So talk to us about the price of capitulation! Repercussions of capitulation will be catastrophic or at least they serious enough to talk about if you are really honest, of course . Capitulation means broken commitments, slaughtered allies, forever brokent trust in USA as word worthy partner.
So my question to Obama is : OK we got your message , you were right then does it mean that you have an alibi for being wrong now?
personal vanity of Bush versus personal vanity of Obama;
May be starting the war was caused by personal vanity of Bush. May be so . But it looks like that loosing the war is a goal dedicated to personal vanity of Obama. Just because he voted against war, war has to be lost . Otherwise … he was wrong! So hurry up Obama , obstruct American efforts to win the war! If the USA will win this war it iwill prove that you were wrong back then voting against the war! You cannot afford it personally , so you have to “ stop Bush” in his efforts to win the war.
We are paying price for mistakes of Bush . I agree with that .Many things were done wrong. But why anybody would think that “ ending the war “ ( read capitulation) just because Obama voted back then against the war, will solve any of our problems? Would capitulation be a monument to Obama’s vanity?
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 .