Iran is Nuclear; Deal With It, Says IAEA's ElBaradei
Iran's progress in enriching uranium has rendered unrealistic world powers' quest to prevent Tehran from gaining nuclear expertise, the U.N. atomic watchdog agency director said. Mohamed ElBaradei did not take issue with a U.N. Security Council demand that Iran suspend enrichment in exchange for a suspension of sanctions against it and talks on a solution that would allay suspicion Tehran is trying to build atom bombs.
"Quite clearly, suspension is a requirement by the Security Council, and I would hope the Iranians would listen to the world community," ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said in remarks published by the New York Times and confirmed by an IAEA official.
"But from a proliferation perspective, the fact of the matter is that one of the purposes of suspension - keeping them from getting the knowledge - has been overtaken by events," ElBaradei said.
... firstly, ElBaradei heading the IAEA is like al Sadr controlling the Catholic church; secondly, the Bush admin was never going to do anything about Iran anyway. Israel, it's your move (but your leadership is as weak as ours!) -Tiger, Observanda
I believe that the majority of Muslims take pleasure in knowing that Islamic countries are now, in the case of Pakistan, and next, with Iran, pleased with the knowledge of Islamic nuclear weapons.
ReplyDeleteThere is a vast emotional immaturity within Islam. All immaturity has a defining moment passing into adulthood. After 911, I was invited to a luncheon with Pakistani businessmen in New York. I was stunned into silence listening to a serious discussion of CIA involvement with 911. Their moment into adulthood had yet to arrive.
A nuclear attack on a US city by any Islamic group will be met with a greater level of denial by Muslims. That will not be their moment of arrival into the reality of their world.
It must be made clear to the world of Islam, that a nuclear attack from any Islamic source and abetted in any way by any Islamic group or nation state will have predicatble consequences that should include the decapitation of Islamic Governments and institutions. That will begin with Iran. No distinction will be made between civilian and military targets. No sanctuary for monuments, mosques or national boundaries. The reprisal would be a total removal of the entire Iranian government and military with the exclusive use of nuclear weapons.
No US ground troops will be served up for target practice, no schools will be painted, no bridges re-built.
We had a couple of years of threats - amplified through the UK Telegraph and suchlike - from various Israeli officials, to the effect that if we don't do it, they will. Been rather quiet, though, hasn't it?
ReplyDeleteMat asked:
Can we arrange a show of hands to show who's favor of keeping 150,000 in Iraq at a cost of 150 billion a year?
For the record, I'm against. I think 20,000 is more than plenty. And I would keep them in Kurdistan.
**********************************
What would be their mission and what would be the composition of those 20K?
duece, the Iranians have no bomb of the nuclear variety, today.
ReplyDeleteIf they do, then deterence works.
The only nuclear mussulman power is Pakistan. The only mussulmen to actively attack the US with terror tactics, in recent memory in the homeland, Saudi wahabbists, not Iranians.
If the US is going to retaliate as you describe, why start with Iran instead of the source of the weapon and the terrorists that used it.
Iran is not the threat that the wahhabbist are, to the US.
A completed condo, in hand, worth a dozen in preconstruction phase. Especially if you need a roof, tonight.
Train, advise & support our allies in Iraq, trish.
ReplyDeleteSupporting the constitiutional government we empowered.
The other mission of the 20,000, to symbolize the US bictory, there, here at home.
"If the US is going to retaliate as you describe, why start with Iran instead of the source of the weapon and the terrorists that used it."
ReplyDeleteI was going to ask the same thing.
Reminds me of some long ago discussions over at the BC. The next 9/11 would inevitably result in massive retaliation against Tehran. Why Tehran? I wanted to know. Then they go all Ledeen on you. I stopped asking.
"Train, advise & support our allies in Iraq, trish."
ReplyDeleteFrom Kurdistan? That's an interesting concept.
But I'd like to hear Mat's answer.
Is there someone deserving of our training, advising, and supporting? I say no. I'd not give that government another dime, another minute, another life.
I pick Iran for a reason:
ReplyDelete1. Number one, the threat is a promise of things to com, "if" something happens.
2. Iran is a great believer in the use of proxy.
3. Iran is the most disciplined and most determined to overtly defy US interests. If Iran were to believe that was not useful, perhaps they could be enduced to modify, through negotiation, a more useful relationship with the US.
4. Pakistan is almost out of control as it is now. There is no credible threat that would work there. Our relationship with Pakistan will be totally reactive.
5. Any change in Saudi Arabia would be for the worse.
I could easily agree that the Oraqi are not worth the effort, trish. But the effort would not be for them, but for US.
ReplyDeleteDisengaging from the day to day policing of Iraqi streets and markets, but still able to make the case the overall effort was and remains a success, for US.
That is a matter of perceptions, stage management and reality.
With reality not always the dominant actor.
So, if the US were attacked by Saudi funded aQ terrorists, with a Pakistani nuclear device, another Saudi funded project, you'd counterattack in Iran.
ReplyDeleteThe foremost enemy of the Sauds.
Because it'd be the easier target?
"Disengaging from the day to day policing of Iraqi streets and markets, but still able to make the case the overall effort was and remains a success, for US."
ReplyDeleteBut you won't be able to make that case when we do pull back, Rat, anymore than we could make it when we pulled off the mean streets of Baghdad two years ago. The daily reality, in our absence, was such that unless you inhabited exclusively the echo chamber of the admin, it didn't wash.
AT WAR
ReplyDeleteWas Osama Right?
Islamists always believed the U.S. was weak. Recent political trends won't change their view.
BY BERNARD LEWIS
WSJ
Wednesday, May 16, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT
The Iraqi will get to complete the "Mission" in the Arab Way.
ReplyDeleteWe will obtain, in part, the ally in the "War on Terror" that wwe claim we desire.
Mr al-Hakim will prosecute the Sunni, we aim him at the Sunni still supportng aQ.
It will be messy, it will then come to an end. It is Iraq. Not the 52nd State of the US.
For your Viewing Pleasure
ReplyDelete52nd state? I'm outta here, things to do.:)
The Iraqi will get to complete the "Mission" in the Arab Way.
ReplyDelete- DR
Then they have no need of us, do they?
The mission is to promote a true, non-sectarian national government in Baghdad. Now, the Shiites have no need of such a thing, so their own mission is and will remain the consolidation of Shiite rule, at direct cross purposes with us.
I'm all for letting them complete their own mission. Let the Iranians continue to help them, if help they need.
They will, those Iranians.
ReplyDeleteIt is not them we would be helping, though they'd get our aid.
We would be helping US.
You'd get an Iraqi version of a non-Sectarian Government, weak in the center, stronger in the regions. Defacto partition of a sort.
Of course each side would try to consolidate power, we'd be there, advising and guiding.
We'd still have the death from above capacity that is needed to defend the Government.
"It is not them we would be helping, though they'd get our aid."
ReplyDeleteHogwash. It is them we would be helping. And we do so to our continued strategic detriment.
If we leave, lock, stock and barrel. we lose all influence there.
ReplyDeleteWe'd cede the inititive to the Iranians, by not even maintaining a rear guard.
We may end up doing that, but it'd be disasterous, strategicly, for US.
So far not even Ms Peosi has taken such a drastic position. Even Ms Clinton, she'd maintain a "Stay Behind" force, or so she says publicly.
What would be their mission and what would be the composition of those 20K?
ReplyDeleteTrish,
Heavy mechanized. Mission would be:
] Keep an eye that the oil fields north of Baghdad don't fall into the wrong hands.
] Help Kurdish forces expand their control over former territories of Iraq.
"We'd cede the inititive to the Iranians, by not even maintaining a rear guard."
ReplyDeleteFunny that that's not the case the admin is making.
The admin is making the case that we'd cede the initiative to AQ.
ElBaradei can surmise all day about the fait accompli that is Iranian atomic bomb acquisiton but others have different plans.
ReplyDeleteThe Israeli's are not going to let it happen. It may cost them everything but they're not stepping into the "showers" again without taking out the Arabs and the Persians.
If we do not initially help we will be draw into the engagement quickly enough so I think we'll help from the get-go. That is also my hope.
Why is Iran important? Transit and cover for AQ and any other of the growing world of Mussulmen maniacs.Transit from Afghanistan and Pakistan of newly trained recruits who need AIT so to speak. It is also important because Iran thinks it is important and is willing to war on nations to prove it..bad psychology.
This is not new. Adams,Jefferson,Washington et.al. realized that Islam was a shit religion bent on domination by force. Islam is the prime reason we built our first naval ships.
So we can feign neutrality as Wilson did in WWI until he too realized we would be drawn into that war, or we can get 'er done with the Israeli's...I don't think this situation can be finessed away. Iran and the Muslim world as DR's Bernard Lewis article pointed out think we're an empty suit (H/T DR) Well, I think we're gonna find out sooner rather than later cause the estimates of bomb acquisition by the Persians keep getting shorter and shorter.
"Help Kurdish forces expand their control over former territories of Iraq."
ReplyDeleteOh, hell no, mat.
Let the Israelis take them up on it.
Trish,
ReplyDeleteI've posted this several times, but I wanted to make sure you see it:
4th Gen war strategists say that the era of successful colonial and neocolonial wars is over. In my view, this is a serious and possibly fatal error. It's not about electricity, it's about land. Everything else flows from that. And this is where the Islamists have them beat.
The Turks dropped Islamism when they lost large swaths of territory. Conquest of land is what drives Islamism. To stop Islamism, we need to reverse this equation. Reward anti Islamists with land at the expense of Islamists and those allied with Islamists.
"Step right up all you skeptics and take a look at the bearded lady, one thin dim, one tenth of a dollar"
ReplyDeleteMore Evidence of Saddam-al Qaeda Ties
An al Qaeda document newly released by the Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) of the United States Military Academy provides an extraordinary new connection to a previously reported order by Saddam Hussein to support al Qaeda attacks upon US forces in Somalia. It corresponds with other documents that show Saddam Hussein was using Islamic terrorists as proxies to attack US interests. The document was part of a US Army report on al Qaeda in Africa. That study contends that although al Qaeda managed to train other Islamic fighters in Africa, it did the organization no long term good, as it failed to bend the region to al Qaeda doctrine.
(ah humm..I believe it was just yesterday I used the word proxy in making my Saddam-AQ connection H/T Habu)
Saddam-Aq Connection
Read it and weep doubters, read it and weep!
Sam
ReplyDeleteI left you some other history at the end of the other post. You may find it interesting too. It is heavily documented.
Well, habu, now that Saddam is good n' gone, what do you propose we do about AQI?
ReplyDeleteTrish,
ReplyDeleteKill 'em
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt's the only good mission left, habu.
ReplyDeleteIt's the only one worthy of us.
Brother D-Day
ReplyDeleteWe're gonna get'er fixed up.
He won't be the Czar..he'll be the Tsar...no,no
He'll be the
THE GREAT PANJANDRUM POOH-BAH HONCHO GENERALISSIMO
He will carry a Roman Fasces and wear high patent leather boots.
I threw in that last part to make our illegal aliens feel more at home here in their soon to be country.
Fasces
Trish,
ReplyDeleteOver the course of time you may have surmised that I'm not much of a bleeding heart or humanitarian.
I'm probably a really, really lousy Christian and will no doubt have to do a good deal of reading to the blind when I hit the rocking chair phase. You know to try and at least bring my Christian grade average up to a "C"
In the meantime I still believe in torturing our enemies, if not for good intel which you rarely get but for the reputation you get "on the street"
I want the reputation as a deterrent to war.If the other bad guys believe you are the baddest mother fucker to ever roam the hills they won't screw with you, they go someplace else.
I don't think it's necessary to walk around in a rage all day, in fact in my personal life I rarely raise my voice. If I encounter a rowdy I try to catch his ear by speaking very softly into it and telling him I'll kill him if he continues his harangue..I've never,never ever had one continue. It shocks them that you can be so calm..now inside I'm ready to rip the guys throat out but he never sees that...he just feels it.
Same way I want the USA..don't mess with us. We like peace and harmony and ok, hegemony too, but someone's gotta have it and it might as well be us.
TR said it..Talk softly and carry a big stick.
At 11:48 I posted a piece from the American Thinker on the Saddam-AQ connection.
ReplyDeleteI think a few observations are in order.
During the run up to OIF the US made it's case to the world and our population. All the big Democrats were in the chorus of voices saying Saddam had WMD etc.
There was some dissent on the AQ connection but the administration held their ground. Why?
We are now releasing captured documents from Iraq. We got tons and tons of 'em. Translation takes time. They are confirming in almost every case what the administration told us initially. But we had to take it on faith and the opposition party was only willing to extend that faith so far before they knew they could "turn" on the war effort.
The point to be made is that in intelligence work you try very hard to NEVER NEVER give up a hint of your sources or methods
They are your lifeblood.
I believe the administration knew of the connection through unimpeachable sources that they could not even allude to.
Over the course of the next ten years as these documents get translated (provided the Democrats do not destroy them) I believe we will see many more examples of correct actions taken by the administration. We may even find the WMD's in Syria where they are right now.
Listening to J Gordon Liddy interview an auther, whose name I missed, just a few minutes ago--guy said that Khomieni had banned and persecuted the 12er's in Iran. If that is so, and I can't recall, sure does show you how really nuts they are now.
ReplyDeleteGuy also said, if we leave Iraq, the Christians get slaughtered to the man woman child over time, and a short time too.
Sounded like he knew his topic but I missed his name.
G Gordan and I can't find the auther on his website.
ReplyDeleteTony Snow tells Rush that since our new citizens came here because they want to work, they should want to become Republican Voters, and it is our challenge to make that happen.
ReplyDelete...like we made Iraq into a freedom loving Western Democracy.
...and of course, as Rush pointed out, Existing Voters are ignored, the better to serve our illegally arrived New Citizens.
ReplyDeleteThe End
That's All, Folks.
Time for "conservative bloggers" to type on ad nauseum about how great it is that the Great GWB finally took care of our "immigration problem."
ReplyDelete...hope he doesn't come up with Ovens for true conservatives before he leaves.
Rest assured, "conservative bloggers" will sing praises to him for that, also.
Onward Christian Martyrs.
Doug,
ReplyDeleteYou're not a conservative blogger?
Darn I had you in the catagory of very frustrated conservative. You know, people like me who had expectattions that in '94 when the Reps were en fuego they'd do away with the Depat. of Education like they said they would.
Or like they've always professed to quite spending money like crazy.
You know (I gotta come up with sump'n asides "you know") like be conservatives, not the worlds cop etc.
Where do you see yourself on the political continuum?
The opposite of Aquarium at Wed May 16, 12:57:00 PM EDT, where he is now telling us to just Wait For Ten Years, and we'll see, almost everything the great Conservative Leader GWB did will turn out to be spot on.
ReplyDeleteHeard that one before.
Give Me a Break!
Habu,
ReplyDeleteSince we're talking Sam Brown belts, Fasces and Jack Boots, let up you a riding crop and cleavage.
Ilsa
I, for one, welcome our new kaisercratic overlords.
Just like Comprehensive Immigration will turn out to be a great idea in 10 years.
ReplyDeleteI'll up you a riding crop...
ReplyDeleteKyl will save us, 'Rat!
ReplyDelete---
Kyl on Immigration, Ctd. [Ramesh Ponnuru]
Mark thinks that Kyl has the power to kill an immigration bill because the White House has given him such an elevated role. I wish this were true, but I don't think it is.
My sense is that the administration would prefer a deal with Kyl to a deal without him, because it would like to get the least possible grief from conservatives. And Mark is right to suggest that Kyl will bring some votes with him whatever he decides to do.
But I don't think the administration believes that it has to get Kyl on board to get a deal—certainly not to get one through the Senate—and I don't think it would be correct to believe that.
Only 41 senators have to oppose the bill to kill it, as Mark notes. But opponents didn't have 41 votes last year, and it's hard to see where those votes would come from now. If the administration's initiative is to die, it is going to take Nancy Pelosi and Rahm Emanuel to land the fatal blow
---
Heard Kyl on the Radio Confirm Ramesh's point.
Besides, since he head's McCain's bid, can't have him opposin Kennedy McCain!
Damn nice riding crop..wonder how she does down the stretch?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIl Duce Pelosi
ReplyDeleteAfter losing a string of embarrassing votes on the House floor because of procedural maneuvering, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has decided to change the current House Rules to completely shut down the floor to the minority.
The Democratic Leadership is threatening to change the current House Rules regarding the Republican right to the Motion to Recommit or the test of germaneness on the motion to recommit. This would be the first change to the germaneness rule since 1822.
In protest, the House Republicans are going to call procedural motions every half hour
Doug, I'm sorry, I know you must be in pain.
ReplyDeleteStanley Holden, 79, a Dancer and Prominent Ballet Teacher, Is Dead
Stanley Holden, whose Chaplinesque blend of wistfulness and wit made him one of the finest character dancers in Britain’s Royal Ballet before he settled in Los Angeles and became one of the area’s most popular ballet teachers, died on Friday in Thousand Oaks, Calif. He was 79.
I was going to mention Nan is throwing a hissy fit but a new poster beat me to it. These people really are arses.
ReplyDeletePrince Harry not going to Iraq
ReplyDeleteLooks like On again Harry is Off again, as far as duty in Iraq is concerned. The reason given by the Army Chief of Staff is that Harry's presence would draw jihadis to attack his unit. Perhaps the Brits can get a list of those approved by the Jihadis and thereby avoid the embarassment of sending anyone who offends them. A delegation from the Birmingham Mosque, perhaps? Needless to say how weak this makes them appear. So much for 'Rule Britannia' eh?
Prince Harry will not be sent to Iraq with his unit, Britain's top general said Wednesday.
Army Chief of Staff Gen. Sir Richard Dannatt said the threat to Harry and his regiment was too great.
"There have been a number of specific threats, some reported and some not reported which related directly to Prince Harry," Dannatt said. "These threats exposed him and those around him to a degree of risk I considered unacceptable."
Sky News' Tim Marshall reported that the reason for the decision was because "he is a magnet for jihadists."
Clarence House, the office of Harry's father, Prince Charles, issued a statement saying Harry was "very disappointed" but will not quit the army.
"He fully understands Gen. Dannatt's difficult decision and remains committed to his army career," the statement said. "Prince Harry's thoughts are with the rest of the battle group in Iraq."
Someone needs to kick their ass, bob.
ReplyDeleteIt will not be part of Czar Lute's job description, though.
It has to be the President, that takes on the Speaker. He has to get out of the bunker and take the inititive.
If he doesn't take this coming diplomatic chance to change course, in June, the GOP will go down with ship.
In days of olde, when knights were bold ...
ReplyDeletePrinces actually led Armies onto the field, as did Kings.
Long ago & far away ...
Now those Princes are to "valuable" to risk.
Their very presence on the field posing a mortal threat to the existence of the Realm.
"What would be their mission and what would be the composition of those 20K?"
ReplyDeleteI'll add: how would we supply them?
20,000 troops in between Iraq, Turkey, Iran, and Syria - all of whom don't like the hosts (the Kurds). Sounds like a great plan.
ReplyDeleteMake up a bunch of 'arry look alikes and ship them over, along with 'arry. Would have to be volunteer work though. If it was good enough for Saddam....
ReplyDeleteEvery plan has its Critics
ReplyDeletePrince Harry's problem is the result of going against the natural course of things for an island nation ... the sea lad , the sea.
ReplyDeleteEngland has (was) always been a sea power. Her century of dominance came solely from her ability to control the oceans of the world.
Harry should have gone into the Navy. Then he could have gone to war as a liaison to American forces and been stationed on a carrier or whatever.
He might even have been able to swing some duty on a British dingy or something out of our lend lease program and been a ship's captain.
Coastal patrol or oil platform guardian.
But he chose the Army and they ain't about to let an English Prince get kidnapped or killed...the propaganda value alone would attract another 100,000 jihadists.
Even better he could serve on one of our subs, never see the light of day, rarely be in any tight spots and still be in the Lord Nelson Cricket League.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSomeone may have already posted this but I'm getting old and the plaque is building up in my brain,in my brain,in my brain...
ReplyDeleteUS military to build four GIANT new BASES in IRAQ.
A report in yesterday's Washington Post said the new bases would be constructed around existing airfields to ensure supply lines and troop mobility. It named the four probable locations as: Tallil in the south; Al Asad in the west; Balad in the centre and either Irbil or Qayyarah in the north.
BASES
NEWSWEEK: Balad Air Base in Iraq Evidence That U.S. Planning to Stay For a Long Time; 15-Square-Mile Mini-City One of Four 'Superbases' Where The Pentagon Will Consolidate U.S. Forces
ReplyDeleteNew $592 Million 'Massive' U.S. Embassy Being Built in Baghdad
NEW YORK, April 23 /PRNewswire/ -- Despite all the political debate in
Washington about a quick U.S. pullout from Iraq, the vast Balad Air Base, a
15-square-mile mini-city of thousands of trailers and vehicle depots
located 43 miles north of Baghdad, is hard evidence that the Pentagon is
planning to stay in Iraq for a long time-at least a decade or so, according
to military strategists.
Stay, ahhh
ReplyDeleteJust a little bit longer
Please, please, please, please, please
Tell me that you're going to
Now your Captain don't mind
And your Colonel don't mind
If we have another pat-rol, ya
Just one more time
Oh, won't you stay
Just a little bit longer
Please let me hear you say
That you will
Won't you place your
Humvee next to mine
Won't you say you cover me
All the time
Oh ya, just a little bit longer
Please, please, please, please, please
Tell me your going to
Come on, come on, come on, stay
Come on, come on, come on, stay, oh la de da
Come on, come on, come on, stay, my, my, my, my
Come on, come on, come on , stay
Hugh Keeps On Truckin'
ReplyDeleteBut there is good news for those with condos in Costa Rico.
costa rica
ReplyDeleteDougy-do,
ReplyDeleteFeel'n low?
I would think your powers of clairvoyance would insulate you from the blues.
Are you a little crampy?
It's ok to feel the loss of you ballet teacher.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCutler,
ReplyDeleteIt is a great plan! And it would be even better if as you mentioned any of those players tries to make a play on Iraq. Gasp, we could actually have a real war.
Live longer. Move near the Kaaba. Stolen from another site Neil Armstrong and the Kaaba
ReplyDeleteCan costa rica compete with this?
American Idol Time !!!!
ReplyDeleteI mean NOW !!!!!
ReplyDeleteAquarium: hard evidence that the Pentagon is planning to stay in Iraq for a long time-at least a decade or so, according to military strategists.
ReplyDeleteBush ran in 2000 on a plank that America shouldn't do any nationbuilding in places like Kosovo or Bosnia, but for the last six years not only has Bush continued to do nationbuilding in Kosovo and Bosnia, but he broke ground in Afghanistan and Iraq too.
Habu: But he chose the Army and they ain't about to let an English Prince get kidnapped or killed...the propaganda value alone would attract another 100,000 jihadists.
ReplyDeleteTonight a lot of English mothers are saying, "If Iraq is too dangerous for Prince 'arry, why should my little Tommy be over there?" And when Gordon Brown takes over for Tony Blair he's not going to be Bush's poodle. This is the end of the "special relationship" between the US and UK, at least until Obama gets in there.
"It is a great plan! And it would be even better if as you mentioned any of those players tries to make a play on Iraq. Gasp, we could actually have a real war."
ReplyDeleteWho's "we," Kemo Sabe?
Latest news is the Republicans caved in the Senate on Kennedy's immigration bill.
ReplyDeleteWell, there goes the neighborhood.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"And when Gordon Brown takes over for Tony Blair he's not going to be Bush's poodle."
ReplyDeleteWell, that's helpful.
Doug: Tony Snow tells Rush that since our new citizens came here because they want to work, they should want to become Republican Voters, and it is our challenge to make that happen.
ReplyDeleteMexican immigrants don't care about tax cuts. The receive welfare at a higher rate than native-born Americans. They vote Democrat by a 2 to 1 margin. If the Republicans are so stupid as to enact policies which will only recruit more Democrat voters, they deserve the consequences.
x
ReplyDeleteAh, yes, habu.
ReplyDeleteThe "enduring bases."
Hope the Iraqis get our money's worth out of them.
Teresita,
ReplyDeleteRe: Bush 2000 platform..
I'll give you one guess as to why things changed? You are aware that nothing is constant but change aren't you?
So your guess is??
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWho's "we," Kemo Sabe?
ReplyDeleteTrish, I prefer zionist infidel, born of a pig and a monkey.
Aquarium: I'll give you one guess as to why things changed? You are aware that nothing is constant but change aren't you?
ReplyDeleteThe presence of US bases in Saudi Arabia are the reason al-Quada attacked on 9-11, and Bush replied by building more and bigger bases in Qatar and Afghanistan and Iraq. Well and good. Take the battle to the enemy. But don't build his nation for him with one hand while fighting him with the other'un. Just like the dream of building the Hispanic Republican Base, this is the same fuzzy-headed utopian wishful thinking that liberals are accused of.
Teresita..times up..I thought you'd get it..
ReplyDeleteIt was 9-11-02 when two fully fueled and passenger loaded airliners were purposely crashed into the Twin Towers and took them down.
When another airliner was crashed into the Pentagon when it was actually trying to hit the White House.
And the third aircraft crashed into a field in Pennsylvania not reaching it's target because it's passengers had learned of the terrorist plot unfolding and took action.
Now Teresita, events like those alter world events and Presidential agendas, much less a campaign platform put together two years prior to those world altering events. One would have to be very shallow not to understand that. You show no signs of being in danger of drowning any time soon. You're not shallow , you're not even damp. You are, however, a bore.
OK. Zionist infidel it is, mat.
ReplyDeleteFrom Iraqslogger.com:
Baghdad – Three months into the job, General David Petraeus says it is difficult to predict how well the surge of troops in Baghdad will succeed before the full number of troops arrive and that he would not have a definitive answer about prospects for stability by September, when he is to report back to Congress.
“I think generally is is still early days. We are literally still just setting the footprint if you will to do what we intend to achieve but until we get all those forces in and have really worked with them for a while I think it’s difficult to see what’s going to happen,” he told me in an interview Tuesday evening.
Petraeus said there was wide recognition that patience in Washington was wearing thin and while the coalition could produce some improvements in security, stability would depend on serious political reconciliation between Iraq’s Shiite-led government and the Sunni minority.
“Clearly they have to show that they are willing to reconcile and that they can make some progress in some legislative areas to give hope to some of the people there that perhaps could put some time on the Washington clock...Come September, I don’t think we’ll have anything definitive in September (although) certainly we’ll have some indicators on the political side in Iraq.”
[...]
No definitive guidance in September. That takes us into the Holidays.
Trish,
ReplyDeleteThe enduring bases..you hope the Iraqi blah blah..
Honeychild the bases are built for our national security.
If you ever thought the Beeka Valley was a haven for terrorist training just allow an uninterrupted line of communication to develop from Afghanistan to Syria and see what havoc Islam will be able to develop. The oil revenues. The strategic location. Give your brain a chance please.
Only the truly uninformed, uneducated, troglodytes would truly want us to totally abandon Iraq .. who the hell do you hang with that you develop these ideas of how things work in the world?
Aquarium: Now Teresita, events like those alter world events and Presidential agendas, much less a campaign platform put together two years prior to those world altering events.
ReplyDeleteWhat you're saying is that it doesn't matter who we elect as President, because any principles he lays out to get elected get overtaken by events in any case.
If you saw the debate last night, you were reminded by Ron Paul that it used to be Democrats who got us into foreign wars, and Republicans who dragged their feet or announced "secret plans" to get us out of them. Who was howling in Congress when Clinton attacked Serbia? The Pubs.
The watershed event in recent history that caused the foreign entanglement party and the isolationist party to swap places wasn't 9-11 but Gulf War One.
Aquarium: Only the truly uninformed, uneducated, troglodytes would truly want us to totally abandon Iraq
ReplyDeleteEurope and China don't have forces in Iraq painting madrassas, but they seem to get all the oil they want. We are surging to 160,000 madrassa-painters and we're losing 900 KIA per year and paying nigh on $4 a gallon for gas.
"Honeychild the bases are built for our national security."
ReplyDeleteOr insecurity, as the case may be.
Wherever concrete is poured, habu, the cry of "enduring bases" goes up. As if we're supposed to shuffle around in the dirt for five years instead.
What I find curious is that the notion of winning in Iraq - even reaching a satisfactory draw - should take a resolute back seat to simply being there. As if being there has some special virtue that transcends not winning.
Now, that IS the charge often leveled by Left against Right. And I would have thought any self-respecting hawk unwilling to settle for such a state of affairs.
There's another term for those "enduring bases" though - and the troops that go with them.
ReplyDeleteShit magnets.
Trish et, al,
ReplyDeleteDo you people have any idea how long it took the United States to put together this nation?
From the Articles of Confederation to the production of the Constitution?
The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, commonly known as the Articles of Confederation, was the first governing document, or constitution, of the United States of America. It was written in summer 1777 and adopted by the Second Continental Congress on November 15, 1777 in York, Pennsylvania after a year of debate. In practice it served as the de facto system of government used by the Congress ("the United States in Congress assembled") until it became de jure by final ratification on March 1, 1781. At that point Congress became Congress of the Confederation. The Articles ...remember 1777.
The Constitution:
After fierce fights over ratification in many of the states, New Hampshire became that ninth state on June 21, 1788. Once the Congress of the Confederation received word of New Hampshire's ratification, it set a timetable for the start of operations under the Constitution, and, on March 4, 1789, the government under the Constitution began operations.....remember 1789..
1777 to 1789 without fanatics trying everyday to create chaos and keep you in the 7th century...
THAT'S TWELVE YEARS FOLKS, TWELVE YEARS
And out there in blogland some of you think it should all get done in Iraq like yesterday ... you people need to get real and you need a good deal more education on the world in general.
"Do you people have any idea how long it took the United States to put together this nation?"
ReplyDeleteHow long do you think it'll take to secure the new Iranian rump state, habu?
Teresita,
ReplyDeleteYou've lost you mind, and you are truly pitiful in your logic and understanding of politics and international relations.
Perhaps there is something you're good at, but you're not up to these discussions. The magnitude of effort one needs to expend on providing you with the knowledge one needs to impart to you just to get you out of the cave isn't worth the effort.
But it is America, you do have the right of free speech ,which includes the right to make a fool of yourself with each keystroke. So have a stroke.
Trish,
ReplyDeleteThat's the deal, no one does. But at this point in history we are sure that Iraq is strategic to our national interests. If you think it isn't make a case for the US getting out of Iraq totally. Make sure to include who you think will control that area of the world within five years. And factor in Israel not alolowing Iran to gain the bomb and how that will affect the global situation.
This should be sweet...
Ted Galen Carpenter writes that withdrawing to Kurdistan is no withdrawal. Link at antiwar.com.
ReplyDeleteI've always liked Ted Galen Carpenter.
"Make sure to include who you think will control that area of the world within five years."
ReplyDeleteNo one. That's a pretty good deal, don't you think?
Trish: Wherever concrete is poured, habu, the cry of "enduring bases" goes up. As if we're supposed to shuffle around in the dirt for five years instead.
ReplyDeletePatton and Bradley and Ike didn't build any bases on their way to Berlin. The closest thing they had was the "quiet" sector in the Ardennes that turned into the Battle of the Bulge. Eleven months from D-day to V-E day. France had a bunch of bases they called the Maginot Line, Hitler went around it. The "base" mentality is one of stasis, where warfare becomes routine, and one faceless commander can be plugged in to replace another after a quick pass-down ritual. We won in Afghanistan with CIA and special forces on horseback, with satellite phones, calling in air strikes and painting the targets with lasers, while the local militias provided the manpower. No bases involved at all.
Couldn't we just withdraw to Israel - their friendly...right?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAquarium: Make sure to include who you think will control that area of the world within five years.
ReplyDeleteAdam Smith and his invisible hand.
9-11-02 Cool!
ReplyDeleteT, if Anthony's Pizza isn't following us wherever we go, we're not doing our jobs.
ReplyDeleteAsh, that is too funny.
There you go, doug.
ReplyDeleteWe both saw that, but it wasn't for me to cite, a simple missed keystroke.
I linked to Carpenter earlier on, whoever he is. Linking to people I disagree with is a bad habit of mine. I think you are right Habu, if Israel goes, we're in some way. My answer, who controls the area in five years if we leave? Iran, and one with nukes.
ReplyDeleteJohnny Cash in San Quentin singing Boy Named Sue
ReplyDeleteI have three of his books, bob. Started reading him in the late 80's.
ReplyDeleteTrish,
ReplyDeleteI've been debating the left anti-war crowd for almost 40 years. From Tom Hayden and the Port Huron statement and the SDS, to Saul Alinsky, the Black Panthers, 60's radicals. Same shit different day.
It gets very tiresome hearing the same blame America first rhetoric and listening to marxist revisonist history.
One thing I know. They can't be educated for they are ideologues and fanatics.
And as Nepoleon said "There is no place in a fanatic's head where reason can enter."
After 40 years I stand with Napoleon.
"And factor in Israel not alolowing Iran to gain the bomb..."
ReplyDeleteIf the Israelis are going to enforce the Begin Doctrine, we have even less to worry about, don't we?
Yeah, 'Rat,
ReplyDeleteI'm feeling kind of guilty myself:
When Bobal congratulated Habu on his honesty for calling me a Hitler Loving Anti-Semite, it suddenly struck me that I negelected to compliment him for calling your Marine son a Coward.
Don't know HOW I could make up for that oversight.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
2164th's graphic is doing something for me.
ReplyDeleteTeresita,
ReplyDeleteI'm just not gonna waste much more time with you, cause that's what it is,a waste of time..
"No bases involved at all."
Bagram Air Base mean anything to you?
Like I said, you're not ready for these discussions.
Doug,
ReplyDeletePull the tread where I called DR's some a coward.
Just an old trick I learned in a book about the CIA for upping the comment count for Deuce and Whit.
ReplyDeleteIn Grammar School, we used to call it:
"Just Kidding"
Habu: Bagram Air Base mean anything to you?
ReplyDeleteRead carefully:
Kandahar fell in December 2001. As of early January 2002 the number of 10th Mountain Division troops had grown to about 400 soldiers.
400 soldieres one month after "mission accomplished" in Afghanistan is not a base, it's a camp.
Sam, on the 'duke and the doctor' radio today, the lady said, not to worry about that article about the multiple vitamins. So now I am more confused than usual, even. She said, if you are going to stay away from vitamins, quit eating.
ReplyDeleteWhat about all those naval bases we've had around the gulf for decades? Abandon them too?
ReplyDeleteDid you ever see Roger Rabbit, T?
ReplyDeleteBagram is Toon Town.
The Bob Barker Special is on--The Million Dollar Price Is Right--on the wife's tv. Be sure not to miss it. He's retiring! I know I won't outlive him, but at least I survived his broadcasting days.
ReplyDeleteWhat's that make Baghdad,
ReplyDeleteNight of the Living Dead?
"What about all those naval bases we've had around the gulf for decades? Abandon them too?"
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry. I thought we were discussing long term prospects in Iraq.
I was thinking we might sink our carriers and make fishing reefs for the Sunnis.
ReplyDeleteThat might be the "straw" that brings reconciliation to fruition.
Use of Bagram Airbase by Allied Forces
ReplyDeleteBy early December 2001 troops from the 10th Mountain Division shared the base with Special Operations Command officers from MacDill Air Force Base in Florida and soldiers of the 82nd Airborne Division from Fort Bragg. As of mid-December 2001 more than 300 American troops, mainly with the 10th Mountain Division, were providing force protection at Bagram. The troops patroled the base perimeter, guarded the front gate, and cleared the runway of explosive ordnance. As of early January 2002 the number of 10th Mountain Division troops had grown to about 400 soldiers.
As of early January 2002 the planned arrival of some 4,500-troop international peacekeeping troops had been delayed, because American troops had priority use of Bagram airfield for offensive operations.
As of late January 2002, there were somewhat over 4,000 US troops in Afghanistan, of which about 3,000 were at Kandahar airport, and about 500 were stationed at the air base in Bagram.
As of mid-March 2002 American heavy construction equipment was employed at Bagram erecting steel frames for new shelters and building earth-filled security barriers. American C-17 transport aircraft were arriving every few hours, and as many as 50 helicopters, including CH-47 Chinooks, AH-64 Apaches, AH-1 Cobras, and UH-60 Black Hawks were visible on the taxiways.
As of mid-June 2002, Bagram Air Base was serving as home to more than 7,000 U.S. and multinational armed services working together in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. Numerous tent areas house the troops based there, including one named Viper City.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"What's that make Baghdad,
ReplyDeleteNight of the Living Dead?"
I think I've read that, Doug.
Oh, yes, I can see it now! Its as clear as a zoning demarcation!
ReplyDeleteAnother stop on the Hajj: the infidel reef, no doubt named something beautiful and Arabic with lots of hyphens and mellifluous intonations...
Millions of Sunnis removing their walking robes and donning their swimming robes.
Saudis scuba diving with shoes, some carrying a few in each hand, so that they may strike the infernal reef!
Bahrainis idling in their yachts, eating flatbread and vegetables so easy to cultivate even Muslims can do it.
What a wonderful world...
Bob,
ReplyDeleteQuit eating. That's a good one. Pretty hard to argue with that.
Unlike Pittsburgh, however, Baghdad has no NFL Franchise.
ReplyDeleteAn aging Bush, arrives at the Beach and dons a swimming robe, given to him by a Saudi brother from another mother.
ReplyDeleteThe prodigal Westerner, the Yalie, dons the Islamic Snorkel, whose polymers were boiled in a factory that pumped its waste toward Israel, and accepted freight rigs in the direction of Mecca.
He dives into the water and begins to swim towards the encrusted control tower. Baptised in the glistening and mystical Arab waters, he is reborn as a citizen of the globe. Bush is finally home.
Doug,
ReplyDeletePut up or shut up time..produce the evidence that I called DR's son a coward ...you made the statement prove it.
Or are you never going to respond like Teresita didn't when I questioned her about UNIT 731--JAPAN'S SECRET LABORATORY OF DEATH...after she slurred the Marines who fought on Guadalcanal.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletebobalharb: What about all those naval bases we've had around the gulf for decades? Abandon them too?
ReplyDeleteSuppose we pull all our carriers back to the east and west coast for homeland defense, and leave the gulf oil nations at the tender mercies of Iran, and suppose Iran threatens to cut off Saudi oil, Kuwaiti oil, UAE oil, etc. Saudi Arabia's military spending is 10% of a GDP of $348.604 billion dollars, while Iran's military spending is 3% of a $212.5 billion dollar GDP. Iran has been embargoed by the US since 1979 and has a few F-4s and F-14s that can hardly fly due to lack of spare parts, and some of Saddam's MiG's, while Saudi Arabia has the latest exportable US stuff.
In other words, let those assholes duke it out.
Meanwhile, back at the Ranch, Roger Hedgecock informs us that MacArthur Park is known as a staging ground for MS-13, a place where the cops rarely go.
ReplyDeleteMayor Antonio "La Raza" Villagarosa has announced that Counciling will be made available to the innocents there that were brutalized by the out of control LAPD.
Perhaps they can sooth them with promises of citizenship, bestowed by Kennedy-McCain, and signed with pleasure by el Presidente.
Habu, you may have deleted the thread, as is a user's right in the world of blogspot.
ReplyDeleteRegulars to BC and EB witnessed what Doug is talking about. Did you forget the PW to the name you said the comment on? If so, its probably still out there.
But don't play those games. We all read it. You seemed to burst into an amused uproad when you learnt DR JR was in artillery. You mentioned how you thought he was in the front lines, not some rear position. DR responded that in Iraq there is no front line - or that everywhere is the front line. Something like that.
Consider your BS called.
an alderman has joined the drinkers
ReplyDeleteabout that pot hole ...
Habu, I could post the Wikipedia article about Rammstein air base in Germany too, but that doesn't mean it contributed to the allied victory.
ReplyDelete"Unlike Pittsburgh, however, Baghdad has no NFL Franchise."
ReplyDeleteSmall oversight on our part.
Habu Hardball.
ReplyDeleteAll the boom of Mach 2.68 without the use of actual velocity.
Like I said, Habu,
ReplyDelete"Just Kidding"
like I thought you might be with the Hitler loving anti-semitism stuff,
but maybe not.
In either case, if it was just made up out of whole cloth, no harm, no foul,
right?
GWB's second victorous carrier landing.
ReplyDeleteOn the Sunday after the terrorist attacks, according to the New York Times, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright preached that 9/11 was a consequence of American foreign policies. Recently, he wrote that the attacks proved that "people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just 'disappeared' as the Great White West went on its merry way of ignoring Black concerns."
ReplyDeleteObama says he does not share his adviser's views, even as he continues to worship at his militantly Afrocentric church in Chicago, which as we noted earlier this year preaches the politics of black separatism.
If Obama hopes to win the White House, he'll have to do better than that to convince a majority of Americans he's a pro-America uniter worthy of taking over this war against Islamic terror as commander in chief.
Obama Blows it
Barkeep...a Glenlivet for Habu
ReplyDeletePerhaps we should just let the new Mexican owners decide what to do about Iraq.
Yeah, 'Rat,
ReplyDeleteI'm feeling kind of guilty myself:
When Bobal congratulated Habu on his honesty for calling me a Hitler Loving Anti-Semite, it suddenly struck me that I negelected to compliment him for calling your Marine son a Coward.
Don't know HOW I could make up for that oversight.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
'Rat suggestions,now!
Now we have Two doug's posting here.
ReplyDeleteHow Quaint!
A Chivas Regal and mountain dew for everyone. And turn on the Bob Barker Special. And keep quiet during the bidding-- I'm thinking.
ReplyDeleteBarak Obama...whose given name is the flying horse that took Mohammed to the rock of the dome where he went to allah (pbuh:pigs be up him).
ReplyDeleteA fitting name for the President of the Mexican States of Norte America don't you think.
Lugh,
ReplyDeleteThey'll try and pawn them off on Uncle Sugar, forgetting that they now ARE Uncle Sugar!
Barkeep...Corona for Doug
ReplyDeleteI wonder how much MS-13 would charge to take over Iraqi operations?
Lugh,
ReplyDeleteLittle known fact:
One of the few wild horse herds resides on the Big Island of Hawaii.
They are a small spirited breed that are direct descendants of the horses used by the Conquistadores.
Perfect Tie in for Barrack Hussein, who spent his younger days doing blow at the ultra-exclusive and expensive Punahoe School in Hawaii.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI'm just here to make sure all EB Booze is bought from the proper channels. Carry on.
ReplyDeleteDoug,
ReplyDeletewho paid for barak's high dollar education? i thought the boy was a waif.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBwahahahahahahahha
ReplyDeletetypetypetypetypetype from my lil FL fortress
Habu, the rhinestone spy, whose Forrest Gump-inspired saga took him to every geopolitically significant location during the past 30 years of history, has issued some orders re: bullshit.
I know you never said coward. The disrespect was present in you chiding DR for his concern about his son's welfare. I'm sure DR can fill in the details if he cares. C'mon Habu; liquor or humors got the best of you at the moment. Forgiveness can be at hand. But don't be so ridiculous and try to Clinton your way out of this.
Doug,
ReplyDeleteYou've lost it buddy..over the falls
I'm no serviceman and at times I worry that I commit this or that faux pas when talking to peers who have served.
ReplyDeletePerhaps, Habu, you and I have suffered the same kind of problem: that we do not understand what they went through, and are in danger of disrespectful foolhardiness if we presume much of anything about it.
I'm sorry, are your broadcasting from your Montanna time share?
ReplyDeleteTaro Si! Mustangs, not so much.
ReplyDeleteHawai'i's last wild horses incur wrath of farmers
HILO, Hawai'i — A Waipi'o Valley taro farmer shot and killed four feral horses over the past two weeks to prevent the animals from damaging his crops, according to an animal control official who said the incidents underscore growing frustration among valley farmers with the last wild horse population in the state.
Sometimes ya'll like Hamas and Fatah with the bickerin and such. Damn good thing the bar management don't allow RPGs in the bar.
ReplyDeleteAnother round on me barkeep.
Horse Killin'!
ReplyDeleteGreat Rufus' Ghost! Why, I'm sure Habu owns some obscure firearm specially designed to punch through horses.
Naw, Lugh:
ReplyDeleteHe lived with his WHITE grandparents, and no doubt got plenty of aid from the Multicultural set that is set in stone in this Democrat Paradise.
M-60's Ok until 4am.
ReplyDeleteFatah and Hamas are savages when it comes to conflict resolution.
ReplyDeleteI much prefer the British way of seeing who can audibly say "Bloody Shameful" with a mouth full of the most puddings.
I'd wager Habu was a bakers dozen pudding-mouth man in his prime.
ReplyDeleteI'd concede that I could barely break 10 in my prime.
:|
The pudding that got away...
ReplyDeleteeoalderman,
ReplyDeleteI would expect such from a saxon overlord. Our tuatha would just have a nice fistfight followed by some fine Irish whiskey.
Alderman Williams,
ReplyDeleteEasily the double game Aldy ole boy, DR.
Anyway it was refreshing to see Doug lose it nad then back down.
Now you get the anonimity of the double. You'll find it refreshing, allowing certain freedoms from those who are predisposed to dislike what you write before they read it.
Enjoy it.
Never had a time share in Montana. And ya know I realize that it just eats at some of the folks that I have done the things I've done and most of them have done relatively nothing in comparison...doesn't bother me whether they believe a word I write. I just did what I did and they did what they did but when they do that comparison deal we all do subconsciously they end up feeling so wasted, so insignificant, so unadventerous..but thats the world.
Anyway Aldy you're obviously someone whose been here a good deal so you can only be one of a very few people...your tells will out you not that I care since I enjoy the entire tater clan, the eyeball, etc...so like I said enjoy it. I think you will find it makes the daily blogging a bit more fun plus it makes it look to newcomers that this place is full which is good for 2164..cause bottom like he has really done a great job and should be thanked more often than he is for his efforts..gotta run..good luck
Song ideas from undamaged '74 & '76 brain cells #88
ReplyDeleteOn Sun, 2006 06 04 22:33 TallDavid said,
Rolling Stones - Brown Sugar / Wild Horses / Cocksucker Blues /
Procol Harem - A Whiter Shade of Pale / Conquistador
Queen - Big Bottom Girls / We Will Rock You / Bicycle
Moody Blues - For My Lady / Tuesday Afternoon / Lovely to See You
Can't You Hear Me Knocking / Honkey-Tonk Women
Yes - Roundabout / Long Distance Runaround / Mood for a Day
Jethro Tull - Aqualung / Thick as a Brick / Teacher / Locomotive Breath
Eagles - Witchy Woman / One of these Nights / Desparado / Hotel California / Take it Easy
Eric Clapton - Cocaine / Layla / I Shot the Shefiff / Wonderful Tonight /
Santana - Black Magic Woman /
Lynerd Skynerd - Tuesday's Gone / Simple Man
Supertramp - Crime of the Century / Dreamer / Bloody Well Right / Breakfast in America / Give a Little Bit
Lou Reed - Sweet Jane
Billy Joel - Captain Jack / Piano Man
Emerson, Lake & Palmer (ELP) - Lucky Man / Karn Evil 9: 1st Impression, Pt. 2
Kip Addotta - Wet Dreams
Wild Thing
ReplyDeleteAs a Spanish port, Aruba was a center for horse-trading, and the horses that remain on the island carry the bloodlines that the conquistadors brought from the Old World.
Expecting a trail ride in Arikok to be a nose-to-tail plod through that otherworldly desert scape, I signed up for a half-day ride at Rancho del Campo,
one of several ranches on the island that offer trail rides. My horse, Blondie, was all white and all muscle. Her breed: paso fino, which means "fine pace;" the horses are known for their steady, smooth gait. Blondie was no trail nag.
---
Aruba was a refinery base for the Netherlands during World War II, and a German U-boat slipped into port and sank the tanker Pedernales. Parts were salvaged, but the center section remains in 20 feet of water.
No predisposition, chap. Just a bit of speculation.
ReplyDeleteDoug has emailed me a few times lamenting that very same "eating" you allude to. It's been tough but he's worked his way out of those dark depths and enjoys contentment with himself and his place in the world, even when he hears of Leather Daddy Habu's silver-studded adventures through steam and muscle and silk and blood.
But let the record reflect that while you might not have said verbatim "coward," you were a straight-up busta and began a beef with many a regular.
"Saudi Arabia's military spending is 10% of a GDP of $348.604 billion dollars, while Iran's military spending is 3% of a $212.5 billion dollar GDP. Iran has been embargoed by the US since 1979 and has a few F-4s and F-14s that can hardly fly due to lack of spare parts, and some of Saddam's MiG's, while Saudi Arabia has the latest exportable US stuff."
ReplyDeleteIf it wasn't for our intrinsic desire for regional stability, I'd say pour fuel on the fire.
But, of course, fuel is the problem.
As for the Saudi Arabian military, let's just say that it is hard to overstate just how big of a regional joke it is. Don't be fooled by the numbers, they're the biggest cream puffs in the region militarily, aside for the smaller Gulf States.
All Moot points,
ReplyDeletesince, as you indicated above, the neighborhood's done been screwed.
Compassionate Conservatism triumphs again.
No need for reconquistadors, the Gringos are more than willing to give it all up.
2 oceans, weak neighbors, and we've decided to play Russian roulette. Massive massive population infusions, effects aggravated by ideas like multiculturalism that are so stupid, only an educated idiot could believe them.
ReplyDeleteAnd even more flabbergasting, we don't even bother to take advantage of the fact that we have the pick of immigrants the world over. Nope, we choose the one option that is most dangerous due to proximity and history.
"March of folly" indeed.
Course, it isn't folly.
ReplyDeleteDemocrats get their voters, Republicans please their business supporters by ensuring cheap labor (which demands continued illegal immigration, since legal immigrants have wage protections).
Status quo continues for the next round of law-breakers, and the next time it becomes an issue, the politicians will be even more afraid to tackle it.
My favorite part of the plan, which Compassionate Conservative George will sign with glee, is that the illegals are rewarded for breaking the law with the privilege of bringing their parents, spouses and children into the United States.
ReplyDeleteMight as well have the dissolution of our society as we know it over and done with ASAP.
No long war this.
Good job with the whole post!
ReplyDeleteI am so glad that I came across this post!