“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Saturday, November 14, 2015

2002 Bernie Sanders: " I am concerned about the problems of so-called unintended consequences. Who will govern Iraq when Saddam Hussein is removed and what role will the U.S. play in ensuing a civil war that could develop in that country? Will moderate governments in the region who have large Islamic fundamentalist populations be overthrown and replaced by extremists? Will the bloody conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Authority be exacerbated? And these are just a few of the questions that remain unanswered.”

Flashback: Rep. Bernie Sanders Opposes Iraq War

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from New Jersey for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I do not think any Member of this body disagrees that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant, a murderer, and a man who has started two wars. He is clearly someone who cannot be trusted or believed. The question, Mr. Speaker, is not whether we like Saddam Hussein or not. The question is whether he represents an imminent threat to the American people and whether a unilateral invasion of Iraq will do more harm than good.
Mr. Speaker, the front page of The Washington Post today reported that all relevant U.S. intelligence agencies now say despite what we have heard from the White House that ``Saddam Hussein is unlikely to initiate a chemical or biological attack against the United States.'' Even more importantly, our intelligence agencies say that should Saddam conclude that a U.S.-led attack could no longer be deterred, he might at that point launch a chemical or biological counterattack. In other words, there is more danger of an attack on the United States if we launch a precipitous invasion.
Mr. Speaker, I do not know why the President feels, despite what our intelligence agencies are saying, that it is so important to pass a resolution of this magnitude this week and why it is necessary to go forward without the support of the United Nations and our major allies including those who are fighting side by side with us in the war on terrorism.
But I do feel that as a part of this process, the President is ignoring some of the most pressing economic issues affecting the well-being of ordinary Americans. There has been virtually no public discussion about the stock market's loss of trillions of dollars over the last few years and that millions of Americans have seen the retirement benefits for which they have worked their entire lives disappear. When are we going to address that issue? This country today has a $340 billion trade deficit, and we have lost 10 percent of our manufacturing jobs in the last 4 years, 2 million decent-paying jobs. The average American worker today is working longer hours for lower wages than 25 years ago. When are we going to address that issue?
Mr. Speaker, poverty in this country is increasing and median family income is declining. Throughout this country family farmers are being driven off of the land; and veterans, the people who put their lives on the line to defend us, are unable to get the health care and other benefits they were promised because of government underfunding. When are we going to tackle these issues and many other important issues that are of such deep concern to Americans?
Mr. Speaker, in the brief time I have, let me give five reasons why I am opposed to giving the President a blank check to launch a unilateral invasion and occupation of Iraq and why I will vote against this resolution. One, I have not heard any estimates of how many young American men and women might die in such a war or how many tens of thousands of women and children in Iraq might also be killed. As a caring Nation, we should do everything we can to prevent the horrible suffering that a war will cause. War must be the last recourse in international relations, not the first. Second, I am deeply concerned about the precedent that a unilateral invasion of Iraq could establish in terms of international law and the role of the United Nations. If President Bush believes that the U.S. can go to war at any time against any nation, what moral or legal objection could our government raise if another country chose to do the same thing?
Third, the United States is now involved in a very difficult war against international terrorism as we learned tragically on September 11. We are opposed by Osama bin Laden and religious fanatics who are prepared to engage in a kind of warfare that we have never experienced before. I agree with Brent Scowcroft, Republican former National Security Advisor for President George Bush, Sr., who stated, ``An attack on Iraq at this time would seriously jeopardize, if not destroy, the global counterterrorist campaign we have undertaken.''
Fourth, at a time when this country has a $6 trillion national debt and a growing deficit, we should be clear that a war and a long-term American occupation ofIraq could be extremely expensive.
Fifth, I am concerned about the problems of so-called unintended consequences. Who will govern Iraq when Saddam Hussein is removed and what role will the U.S. play in ensuing a civil war that could develop in that country? Will moderate governments in the region who have large Islamic fundamentalist populations be overthrown and replaced by extremists? Will the bloody conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Authority be exacerbated? And these are just a few of the questions that remain unanswered.
If a unilateral American invasion of Iraq is not the best approach, what should we do? In my view, the U.S. must work with the United Nations to make certain within clearly defined timelines that the U.N. inspectors are allowed to do their jobs. These inspectors should undertake an unfettered search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and destroy them when found, pursuant to past U.N. resolutions. If Iraq resists inspection and elimination of stockpiled weapons, we should stand ready to assist the U.N. in forcing compliance.



  1. For about the 90th day in a row, the Iraqis are just a day or two away from retaking Ramadi.

    Meanwhile, the Shi'ite Turkmen are fighting the Kurds up around Kirkuk.

    The Worst Fucking Army In The History, Present, or Future of the World.

  2. Here we are 13 years later and the fools are out howling for another round...Fourth, at a time when this country has a $6 trillion national debt and a growing deficit, we should be clear that a war and a long-term American occupation of Iraq could be extremely expensive.

    Are we safer, wiser, richer, more free? ISIS is goading us into even greater involvement. Why? It is obvious.

  3. As Fido said, after trying to diddle the polecat:

    I ain't had all I want; I just had all I can stand.

    Good Night. :)

  4. It's all Obama's fault for taking the troops out too soon

    That is what allowed ISIS to grow.

    Like it or not, there were three or four years of peace there before Obama allowed the shit to hit the fan.

    It may not have been such a brilliant idea to go in, but we all voted for it because we all voted for Bush, and McCain.

    Bernie's statement is not bad, by the way.

  5. What happened in Paris last night happens every day somewhere In the ME. If it is terror in Paris it is terror in Syria, Libya, Gaza or Iraq.

    Total madness.

    1. Today in Israel, Hebron, to be specific, Palestinian terrorists ambushed a car and shot it up, killing a father and son...

      No news here...

    2. What is the common factor ?

      Islam, of course.

      Good Night and

      Cheers !

    3. Funny that you should mention Hebron:

      A day after Israeli forces fatally shot 28-year-old Abdullah al-Shalaldeh inside a West Bank hospital, the victim's cousin has also died of wounds inflicted by Israeli forces.

      Mahmoud al-Shalaldeh, 18, died on Friday after being shot by an Israeli soldier the previous day during clashes in Hebron, a relative told Al Jazeera.

      "The Israelis have committed a crime against this family. It was unnecessary killing," Fatima al-Shalaldeh, a journalist who is distantly related to the victims, told Al Jazeera.

      They did not have to shoot and kill Abdullah in the hospital. They could have handcuffed him instead.

      Amnesty International has called for a thorough investigation into Abdullah's killing, which saw an undercover military unit storm Hebron's al-Ahli hospital in the early hours of Thursday morning. An estimated 21 officers participated in the operation, which was ostensibly aimed at questioning Abdullah's cousin, Azzam al-Shalaldeh, who was awaiting surgery in hospital after being shot by an Israeli settler last month

      Abdullah, who was visiting Azzam, was shot multiple times in the head and body by Israeli forces after exiting the toilet, according to reports. Azzam was also arrested in the raid, in which Israeli officers entered the hospital disguised in keffiyehs and fake beards. One was dressed as a pregnant woman.

      "They did not have to shoot and kill Abdullah in the hospital. They could have handcuffed him instead," Fatima said.

      The Palestinian health ministry has publicly decried Abdullah's killing as an "assassination", while Amnesty said it appears to have met the criteria for an extrajudicial execution.

      "The evidence suggests this killing was unlawful, as there was no imminent threat to the life of members of the Israeli forces or of anyone else," Jacob Burns, research and campaigns assistant for Amnesty's Israel/Palestine team, told Al Jazeera.

      Extrajudicial execution is the term used to describe an unlawful and deliberate killing carried out with the complicity of state or military officials.

    4. HEBRON

      ....Tahseen Elayyan, the head of monitoring and documentation for the Ramallah-based rights group al-Haq, agreed that Abdullah's killing violated international humanitarian law.

      "We believe that the Israeli occupation forces were undercover and used excessive force, and their entrance into a protected area such as a hospital constitutes a war crime," Elayyan told Al Jazeera. "[Abdullah] could have really been controlled without lethal force."

      Issa Amro, coordinator of the Hebron-based activist group Youth Against Settlements, told Al Jazeera that Palestinians no longer feel safe anywhere - "at home, in the street, in the hospital or in the mosque". He was critical of the Palestinian Authority's failure to step in.

      "The people are very angry. They don't want the Palestinian Authority without authority... We don't any more want a fake government that doesn't control any land," he said.

      Shada Haddad, a 25-year-old resident of Hebron's Tel Rumeida neighbourhood, expressed fear about what turmoil may still be ahead.

      "Every day is worse than the one before it," she told Al Jazeera. “Any mother here wonders if her son will go out and not come back home."

      Al Jazeera

  6. The terror in Paris was the predicted outcome of the US and UK attack on Iraq. There is nothing more terrifying than an attack by modern war planes with high explosives on a city. To those on the ground, Muslims, the state sponsored terrorists, Christian pilots, bombing their towns, cities and neighborhood brought shock and awe to the Middle East. Shock and awe quickly became hate and revenge.

    If you fail to understand that the hundreds and thousands of Muslims civilians killed by the Christian armed forces of the US and UK, the millions displaced, the destruction of lives, property and people’s future was an obscene use of terror.

    The hate and revenge has come home again. The cycle continues.

  7. Here is an example:

    What is "Occupation"Sat Nov 14, 12:53:00 AM EST
    Today in Israel, Hebron, to be specific, Palestinian terrorists ambushed a car and shot it up, killing a father and son...

    No news here...

    How many times have Israeli airstrikes terrorized and bombed Arab civilians? How many times has Israeli terrorism come in the form of artillery barrages on civilian targets?

    Each time, how many were drawn into a cycle of hate and revenge?

    Would a bulldozer knocking down the family home of an eight year old terrorize a child? What is in the heart and mind of that child when he is eighteen? If we wasn’t a terrorist, it would be a surprise to me but incredibly if you consider all the destruction done by Israel and the US in the Middle East during the past 14 years, the amount of retaliation is minimal.

  8. Revenge
    Getting Even

    The passion for revenge is strong and sometimes almost overwhelming. But our intuitive logic about revenge is often twisted, conflicted, parochial, and dangerous. Revenge is a primitive, destructive, and violent response to anger, injury, or humiliation.

    It is a misguided attempt to transform shame into pride. Many governments, religions, traditions, and cultures provide guidance on when revenge may and may not be sought. Unfortunately this guidance is often unsatisfactory because it excludes groups of people, often mistreats women, generally leads to escalation, is unevenly applied, and typically leads to prolonged and escalated violence.

    Revenge is directed passionately at a specific target with the intent of doing them harm because you believe they have intentionally done you harm. It is the dark side of reciprocity.

    Reprisal is a retaliation for an injury with the intent of inflicting at least as much injury in return.

    Retaliation is the idea of fair payback, often expressed as “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” and is captured in traditions such as the Talionic Code. The concept is to cause as much pain to the aggressor as he has caused you to suffer. Unfortunately the magnitude gap—the fact that pain felt is more intense than pain inflicted—often causes the violence of the retaliation to exceed that of the original offense. Unending escalation, destruction, and violence often results. Also, because many losses cannot be restored or undone, the retaliation does not provide satisfying reparations to the victim.

    Vengeance is pursuing harm to your offender as retaliation for the wrong you perceive they caused. It is a passionate desire for revenge.

    Avenging a wrong is pursing revenge to punish those who you hold responsible for a loss to yourself, or someone else you respect.

    Is there any surprise here?

    How about a prediction?

  9. Revenge originates from the primal need for self-defense. It is a destructive and futile response to anger or humiliation. The only way to stop this is to lower the level violence and lessen the number of victims. If you think there is anyway that more violence is an answer, you have learned nothing in life and will be unwittingly supportive of more innocent lives being lost and destroyed.


    2. So you're an advocate of forgiveness?

    3. I am an advocate for pragmatism. Hostility and violence causes more hostility and violence. Forgiveness often releases the forgiver from a destructive hate. It is more of a gift to the self than the other. It contains the circle of violence rather than expanding it.

      You may hate someone so intensely that revenge is the only thing that will satisfy you, but in your revenge you may instigate another lust for revenge in another that will ultimately hurt someone close to you. That is the paradox of revenge.

  10. What kind of society is the Middle East, including Israel?

    From the Jerusalem Post:

    After decades defending the rights of children, Yitzhak Kadman is still shocked at some of the cases that come to his attention, he said Tuesday at the Jerusalem launch of a new initiative against child abuse in Israel.

    Kadman, the director of the National Council for the Child, was one of a series of speakers at the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem marking the opening of the program. It was spurred by the disturbing findings of a recent survey on child abuse conducted by Prof. Zvi Eisikovits and Prof. Rachel Lev-Wiesel from the University of Haifa.

    The findings indicated that 52.9% of children had suffered some form of abuse and victimization; 31.2% had suffered emotional abuse, 18.7% sexual abuse, 18% physical neglect, 17% emotional neglect, 17 % physical abuse and 9.8% were witnesses to domestic violence within their own families. The survey also showed that Arab children suffer more abuse than Jewish children on all levels.

    Among both Jewish and Arab children, boys were more frequently subjected to abuse than girls. This included sexual abuse, with 19.6% out of a total of 5,650 boys and 17.5% out of 6385 girls having been the victims of sexual abuse.

    Non-profit organizations and public institutions will combine to implement the initiative, named Mihalev, a Hebrew acronym for the prevention of violence against children which also means “from the heart.”


  11. What does that portend for the future?

  12. Total Madness Deuce

    At what point does a civilized person stop appeasing or tolerate madness?

    To forgive madness is insane in itself.
    What is the desired outcome of addressing madness.
    "Healing" or vengeance or something else like education of the sick mind?

  13. We know what 14 years of following the Neocon agenda has accomplished. The model has been discredited in every country that it has been applied.

    Iraq, Syria, Libya all had relative stability under autocrats as did Afghanistan.

    The societies under these autocrats, although far from perfect all kept a lid on internal terrorism.

    Destabilization was to benefit Israel. There was no other reason for it. It was meant to level the field for Israel.

    It has been a catastrophe for the people in those countries. The final results are unknown but based on the past and to be kind, it is not working.

    Stability must be reestablished in the countries that we destabilized, regardless of who is chosen by the individual countries. An election or a democracy is out of the question. It simply does not work.

  14. The only requirement placed upon them should be that law and order be reestablished. I think that Nato and the US should not play a part in the process as both have been thoroughly discredited.

  15. Nothing will improve without stability and the ending of Western meddling.

    All US military bases should be abandoned in the Middle East. All of them.

  16. The US and Europe should focus on the extremely violent jihadists in our own countries. We need the enthusiastic cooperation of those that know them best and that is in the Muslim communities.

    Quit killing them. Minding our own business and with time this will settle out.There is no other solution.

  17. The US should abandon the automatic veto in the security council when it comes to Israel. US Israeli relationships should be normalized so that the relationship is comparable to US/Columbian relations, friendly and nothing special.

    Unquestioned US subservience to Israel has produced an arrogant belligerent lawless state that serves no US interest.

  18. Anyone have a better solution? I am all ears.

  19. Want to engage in some mental masturbation, I’ll suggest one of my own. Bring those in the Bush administration including George Bush to trial and let them defend what they did.

    1. OK, a fair trial would be refreshing.
      A trial that isn't held in the media, like what we've seen.


    In the wake of the horrific Paris attacks that claimed the lives of at least 153 innocent people, FOX News and some Republican presidential hopefuls wasted no time to fear monger and stir up some good-ol-fashioned Islamophobia.

    FOX anchor Megyn Kelly hosted R-NY Representative Peter King, a former IRA sympathizer, who stated in the interview:

    "This was terrorism at its worst. This can happen in any major, large city in the U.S. and Europe. We always have to be on our guard. I hope this is a wake up call. I hope the president is listening when he says that ISIS is contained."

    He added, "This shows it's going to be a long, hard fight before ISIS or al-Qaeda or Islamic terrorism is contained and destroyed. This is a war, we have to realize it and stop holding back and stop making believe our main worry is how fast we can close Guantanamo. Our main goal should be how quickly we can destroy ISIS."

    Meanwhile, Kelly questioned whether the U.S. has an adequate enough screening process for Syrian refugees and suggested we return to the color-coded terrorism threat level indicators that were omnipresent during the post-9/11 and Iraq quest for fictitious weapons of mass destruction.

    Bruce Hoffman, Director of the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University, who has nearly four decades of terrorism research experience, stated in his report, Terrorism and the Media, that this type of media coverage is actually harmful to our national security.

    He writes, "Only by spreading the terror and outrage to a much larger audience can the terrorists gain the maximum potential leverage that they need to effect fundamental political change."

  21. A key factor of their objective is to create fear among the target population. Hoffman argues, "it is an essential factor in any terrorist's agenda that the whole tactic of terrorism is based upon, and that is visible in all parts of terrorist activity."

    This strategy to gain attention is intentional. To an important extent, terrorists also want to intimidate the audience and the target government so that "even the threat of possibly becoming victim of terrorist violence is enough to create fear."

    The whole point of terrorism is to create terror, and FOX News is playing right into their twisted game. But this doesn't stop some Republican presidential hopefuls from joining in on the fray.

    Ben Carson spoke to a group of Republican Party activists at an event Friday evening, as the attacks were occurring -- meaning the culprits were yet to be properly identified.

    "If we're going to be bringing 200,000 people over here from that region -- if I were one of the leaders of the global jihadist movement and I didn't infiltrate that group of people with my people, that would be almost malpractice," said Carson.

    He asserted the Obama administration lacks "the kind of vision that would allow you to recognize that once you've gotten a place like Iraq under control you don't withdraw, which leaves an incredible vacuum and allows for the development of things like ISIS."

    "There are those out there who have a thirst for innocent blood in an attempt to spread their philosophy and their will across this globe," Carson added. "We must redouble our efforts and our resolve to resist them. Not only to contain them, but to eliminate that kind of hatred in the world."

    In a statement on the Paris attacks, Ted Cruz said, "We need to immediately declare a halt to any plans to bring refugees that may have been infiltrated by ISIS to the United States. We need to redouble our efforts to prevent ISIS agents from penetrating our nation by other means."


    1. Donald Trump characteristically posted a smug "I told you so," style Tweet.

      Marco Rubio thumbed a status as part of a six-Tweet novella, reminiscent of a Team America response to terrorism. He wrote, "These brutal terrorist attacks against innocent civilians are a reminder of the increasing dangers facing free peoples around the world."

      This assault was undeniably horrific and demands a sensible, well-planned response. But these statements and news broadcasts are emotional and political pandering at its worst.

      These statements were made before the attackers were identified, further cementing that too many Americans just associate "terrorism" with "Islam."

      In June, Dylann Roof, a white supremacist, shot and killed nine African-Americans in a Charleston church, hoping to "start a race war." However, Americans were apprehensive to label this fatal mass-shooting massacre as a terrorist attack, despite his motives to stroke fear, anger and social strife -- as noted in his manifesto.

      Not only is this hypocritical, but also a racist attitude that contributes to constant conflict between the Western and the Arab regions.

      Anyone watching the news during this event was inundated with stomach-churning images of civilians frantically running for their lives, reports of suicide bombing and police bravely marching through a wave of chaos and destruction to protect and rescue the victims of such a senseless, depraved act of violence.

      Such an occurrence should be a reminder to appreciate your loved ones and a time to offer condolences to those who experienced the grave reality of how sudden a freak catastrophe can drastically alter one's life. We constantly live on the brink of existence and death, and the shootings and bombings in Paris served as a stark reminder of that.

      When FOX News fires up the war hawk, fear-mongering partisan propaganda machine and men vying to lead our nation attempt to stir xenophobia in the aftermath of global carnage, we should be disgusted at their knee-jerk reaction to use such a ghastly event to push an agenda on us at a time when we're emotionally fragile.

      The shock from such a spontaneous act of gruesome bloodshed hasn't even worn off before the grieving sinks in, and we have influential figures calling for an attack on Syria and to refuse innocent refugees seeking solace from a reality of daily violence.

      Immediately latching this event onto an aggressive foreign policy stance and a nativist immigration platform serves as an injustice to the American people.

      This isn't just morally bankrupt, it's borderline sociopathic.

      Let’s take a collective deep breath and use these moments following this attack to reflect on how valuable our lives are, how precious it is to live in a secure country that cherishes freedom and offer our thoughts, prayers and sincere condolences to those who lost their lives to and are affected by this tragedy.

    2. Yesterday on the same day as the paris attacks, arabs were shooting jews in hebron, stabbing jews in milan...

      no news here.

      same shit

    3. As for creating fear?

      Yeah the islamists seek that...

      Nothing a well armed civilian population cannot counter...

  22. Nothing will improve without stability and the ending of Western meddling.

    Stability under a sick mindset isn't healthy for anyone involved.
    Kings and warlords won't address the underlying issue of Islam on the intellectual level, imo.
    They have used and set apart the differences of the Muslims for their benefit.

    The main theological points must be addressed, as much as the atheists hate to even consider.
    Do you agree?

    1. It is their business. We thought we had all the answers and we were wrong.. Any theological change comes from within. It is not our business to address it for anyone.

      We need to mind our own business and respect the need for others to do the same and expect the same.

    2. And where does it say in the islamic handbook that the good muslim must mind his own business?
      It doesn't.

      It is to conquer the world.

    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    4. To ignore this is madness, imo.

    5. Are Christians missionaries minding their own business? Isn’t their mission to convert the world for Jesus? Isn’t that the foundation to a Christian life? Try Acts 1-2 and tell me that is minding your own business.

    6. They are to spread the "Good News" that death and sin have no power over the follower of Christ.
      A religious freedom, free from religion.
      A way of Life.

    7. Yes Deuce, Christianity has sucked for the natives.

      But today is today..

      Islam is the savage of the day, not the christian missionaries.

      Nor the Jews.

      In fact?

      Every attack by Islam proves why israel is right and the arabs are wrong.

  23. And before you get too caught up in the frenzy and hysterical about the Islamist threat, consider this:

    From 2004 to 2014, 303 Americans were killed in terrorist attacks worldwide, according to State Department reports.

    During that same time frame, 320,523 Americans were killed as a result of domestic gun violence.

    When you are shot dead, it is irrelevant who is doing the shooting. You’re dead.

  24. What does the attack mean for the future of Europe?

    Peter Foster, our Europe editor, has been analysing what the Paris attack means for the future not just of Europe's open borders agreement, but the ideal of a tolerant, multi-cultural Europe itself.

    Davis Lewin, the deputy director of the Henry Jackson Society, a conservative think-tank says the attacks threaten the “very essence" of the European way of life and warns that unless mainstream politicians confront the menace posed by radical Islam, they will open the door to far-Right parties.

    “The political classes cannot keep saying – as Merkel is saying – that ‘there is nothing to see here’, that the problem is not related to Islam, when everyone can perfectly well see that it is,” he says.

    Meanwhile Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform, a pro-EU think-tank, warns that a September 11-style knee-jerk reaction will play straight back into the extremists’ hands.

    “Islamic State want to get Marine Le Pen stronger. They want far-Right attacks on mosques and a warlike ambience in western countries, because the more Muslims are persecuted, the more Muslims will be motivated to pick up arms and fight in Western Europe,” he says.

    1. That my friends, is the Paradox we face.

    2. ...a September 11-style knee-jerk reaction will play straight back into the extremists’ hands.

      Which, in my opinion, is why the Media needs to get own board with an open dialog with all the religions of the world.
      But that will never happen.

    3. Dogma, we have had the dialogue, the Moslems have told use honestly, you must submit to Allah...

  25. Falstaff was wrong; "First" we kill all the Preachers.

  26. “Do you realize what you have done?”

    Nor, I’m sure, will you be shocked to learn that an anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim fervor is now gripping parts of Europe, while far-right parties are, not coincidentally, on the rise.

    This is true in France, where Marine Le Pen’s virulently anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, anti-European-Union National Front is expected to make significant gains in local elections this winter (and Le Pen herself is leading early opinion polls in the race for the presidency), while in “tolerant” Sweden a far-right party with neo-Nazi ties is garnering more than 25% of the prospective vote in opinion polls. In Poland, an extreme party wielding anti-refugee rhetoric just swept into power. And so it goes across much of Europe these days.

    All of this (and more) represents a stunning development that could, sooner or later, reverse the increasingly integrated nature of Europe, raise walls and barriers across the continent, and irreversibly fracture the European Union, while increasing nationalistic fervor and god knows what else. In the United States, in a somewhat more muted way, you can see similar developments in what’s being talked about here as an “outsider” election, but is, in fact, significantly focused on keeping outsiders separated from insiders. (Just Google Donald Trump, Ben Carson, and immigrants, and you'll see what I mean.) Isn’t it strange how we always speak of the “tribal” when it comes to Africa or the backlands of Pakistan and Afghanistan, but never when it comes to our world? And yet, if these aren’t, broadly speaking, “tribal” responses, what are?

    Should the flood of desperate refugees from the failed or failing states of the Greater Middle East sooner or later alter the configuration and politics of Europe, then perhaps we will finally be able to write a true obituary for the invasion of Iraq that George W. Bush & Co. launched with such blind confidence. After all, how many single acts in historical memory, other than perhaps the assassination of an archduke in 1914, have potentially altered the political configuration of such vast stretches of the planet in more radical and devastating ways?

    Tom’s Dispatch

  27. Am I the only one that doesn't really give a fuck that some people got killed in France?

    1. Most likely.

      You drank the finer human sensibilities away long ago.

  28. The French have spent the better part of the last thousand years fucking with other people, invading their countries, and attempting to steal their resources.

    Now, someone treats'em to a typical Chicago Friday Night? Fuck'em; bring on the football.

    1. Rufus, name one people in the world that lived a perfect co-existant life that never fucked with other people?

    2. The arabs Rufus, have spent the day they were born from the handmaiden Hagar, fucking with other people.

      Maybe we should take your mantra and apply it to the arabs and moslems..

      That's why the Turks squashed them for 500 years...

  29. PARIS TERRORIST 'SYRIAN REFUGEE'......................

    Deuce is on record as wanting to bring 4 million of these ass holes to the USA. This is insane.

    Obama is pledged to 200,000. The is also insane.

    Zero is the correct number.

    If any at all come, probably the most strategic place for them from their point of view is in Hamtramck, Michigan, where they can immediately put some muscle to the effort of First we show the Poles, then everybody else

    Quirk at least can get out, as he has an open invitation the The Farm of Refuge out west.

  30. Ted Cruz at least (and Trump too) as a firm grip on the issue -

    November 14, 2015
    Ted Cruz calls for end to Syrian refugee resettlement
    By Carol Brown

    While the Obama administration is “moving to increase and accelerate the number of Syrian refugees who might be admitted into the United States,” Senator Ted Cruz is calling for an immediate halt to Syrian refugee resettlement. Half of them aren’t from Syria and most of them are colonizers, but no matter. Let’s get about the business of doing as much as we can as fast as we can to save ourselves. And this is a start. Per The Right Scoop, Cruz put out the following statement on Friday:

    “America must stand with our allies against the scourge of radical Islamic terrorism. This is an evil that does not discriminate between French, German or American, Christian, Muslim or Jew, soldier, football player, or concert goer. Their only goal is to murder those who do not submit to their vicious, totalitarian ideology. Our deepest condolences go out to our French allies, and I know the government of the United States stands by to offer any assistance necessary.

    “We must now face the facts. Between the downing of the Russian jet over Egypt and this massive coordinated attack on Paris, we are seeing an unmistakable escalation of ISIS’ ambitions and the scale of their terrorist attacks outside Syria and Iraq. Even as chaos rages in Paris, we need to take immediate, commonsense steps to preserve our own safety. We need to consult closely with our NATO allies who may be targeted for additional attacks. We need to immediately declare a halt to any plans to bring refugees that may have been infiltrated by ISIS to the United States. We need to redouble our efforts to prevent ISIS agents from penetrating our nation by other means.

    “Such steps, however, are defensive reactions to an enemy that will continue to try to attack us until they succeed once again. We must immediately recognize that our enemy is not ‘violent extremism.’ It is the radical Islamism that has declared jihad against the west. It will not be appeased by outreach or declarations of tolerance. It will not be deterred by targeted airstrikes with zero tolerance for civilian casualties, when the terrorists have such utter disregard for innocent life. We must make it crystal clear that affiliation with ISIS and related terrorist groups brings with it the undying enmity of America—that it is, in effect, signing your own death warrant.”

    Let’s get going. Because 10,000 of said “refugees” (aka young, fit, fighting age, male colonizers) just arrived in New Orleans and will eventually be dispersed to 180 cities across America that coordinate with nine charities (and their affiliates) to make sure these invaders get everything they need.

    Hat tip: The Hayride

  31. Obama is either a certified idiot, or a jihadi sympathizer -

    November 14, 2015
    Good news: Obama said yesterday ISIS is 'contained' and 'not gaining strength'
    By Rick Moran

    Before the Paris terrorist attacks began, President Obama appeared on ABC's Good Morning America in a pre-recorded interview with George Stephanopoulos. What he said about progress being made in the war against Islamic State would come back to haunt him a few hours later.


    Stephanopoulos asked Obama if ISIS was gaining in strength, to which Obama denied they were.

    “I don’t think they’re gaining strength,” Obama responded. “What is true is that from the start, our goal has been first to contain and we have contained them. They have not gained ground in Iraq, and in Syria they’ll come in, they’ll leave, but you don’t see this systemic march by ISIL across the terrain.”

    “What we have not yet been able to do is to completely decapitate their command and control structures,” he admitted. “We’ve made some progress in trying to reduce the flow of foreign fighters and part our goal has to be to recruit more effective Sunni partners in Iraq to really go on offense rather than simply engage in defense.”

    In fact, Islamic State is gaining strength and is far from being contained. The president apparently gets fauilty briefings from the military if he is unaware that ISIS has been capturing territory in northern Syria, moving closer to the second largest city of Aleppo. As far as "containment" of ISIS is concerned, I guess Paris proves that Obama has a weird idea of what the term means.

    The president of the United States is a certified idiot. He first referred to Islamic State as the "JV" - junior varsity compared to al-Qaeda. That was a few weeks before ISIS captured half of Syria and a third of Iraq.

    And now we get word that the move to import 75,000 refugees from Syria is still on track, despite the fact that the FBI is incapable of vetting all of them. It's one thing to reach out and try to help people. It's quite another to invite terror attacks by letting people into the country that have been mixed in with the refugee population.

    Imagine if a Republican president had made those idiotic comments in the morning................

    Meanwhile Rufus acts the ape declaring the French deserved it somehow and cares less about the dead in Paris, and Deuce wants to bring 4 million Syrians to the USA.

  32. "Concealed carry' would have helped - but no guns in France - slaughtered like cattle - no one able to fight back -

    November 14, 2015
    When seconds counted...
    By Russ Vaughn

    It was Friday evening, and I was listening to a survivor of the Bataclan Theater terrorist attack in Paris describe how it took place. The attackers wisely seized the high ground, the balconies, where they were able to fire down into the masses of people packed into the overcrowded main floor. According to this witness, the terrorists were able to continually fire their weapons randomly into their helpless victims for ten to fifteen minutes before the police assault finally took them down.

    Listening to that, my first thought was this: what if the members of that audience, who were all unarmed by French law, didn't have to simply wait passively to be random victims? What if Paris was a city that permitted concealed carry? In an audience of more than a thousand, perhaps one in twenty might have been packing. That's more than fifty citizens who could have been returning fire on those terrorists. Sure, it would be handgun rounds against automatic rifles and possibly shotguns, but trust me, those three shooters wouldn't have been randomly shooting helpless fish in a barrel had they had incoming rounds from that many firing points – even from half that many. When they were able to raise their heads over the balcony rails, they would have been targeting those citizen shooters instead of killing the helpless...or they might have fled in the face of return fire, as terrorists sometimes do.

    The growing body count as of this writing is 120 slaughtered in the Bataclan. We'll never know how much that body count could have been reduced if the foolish French allowed their citizens to go armed. Their imprudent gun control laws contributed to unnecessary carnage.

    Once again, when seconds counted, the police were just too many minutes away.

    My wife and I, we don't care, we're old now, we would have been firing back, going out, at least, in a blaze of resistance.

    She was talking about it last night....I agreed...

  33. The Barbarians Are Inside, And There Are No Gates

    by Mark Steyn
    Steyn on Europe
    November 13, 2015

    As I write, Paris is under curfew for the first time since the German occupation, and the death toll from the multiple attacks stands at 158, the vast majority of them slaughtered during a concert at the Bataclan theatre, a delightful bit of 19th century Chinoiserie on the boulevard Voltaire. The last time I was there, if memory serves, was to see Julie Pietri. I'm so bloody sick of these savages shooting and bombing and killing and blowing up everything I like - whether it's the small Quebec town where my little girl's favorite fondue restaurant is or my favorite hotel in Amman or the brave freespeecher who hosted me in Copenhagen ...or a music hall where I liked to go to hear a little jazz and pop and get away from the cares of the world for a couple of hours. But look at the photographs from Paris: there's nowhere to get away from it; the barbarians who yell "Allahu Akbar!" are there waiting for you ...when you go to a soccer match, you go to a concert, you go for a drink on a Friday night. They're there on the train... at the magazine office... in the Kosher supermarket... at the museum in Brussels... outside the barracks in Woolwich...

    Twenty-four hours ago, I said on the radio apropos the latest campus "safe space" nonsense:

    This is what we're going to be talking about when the mullahs nuke us.

    Almost. When the Allahu Akbar boys opened fire, Paris was talking about the climate-change conference due to start later this month, when the world's leaders will fly in to "solve" a "problem" that doesn't exist rather than to address the one that does. But don't worry: we already have a hashtag (#PrayForParis) and doubtless there'll be another candlelight vigil of weepy tilty-headed wankers. Because as long as we all advertise how sad and sorrowful we are, who needs to do anything?

    With his usual killer comedy timing, the "leader of the free world" told George Stephanopoulos on "Good Morning, America" this very morning that he'd "contained" ISIS and that they're not "gaining strength". A few hours later, a cell whose members claim to have been recruited by ISIS slaughtered over 150 people in the heart of Paris and succeeded in getting two suicide bombers and a third bomb to within a few yards of the French president.

    Visiting the Bataclan, M Hollande declared that "nous allons mener le combat, il sera impitoyable": We are going to wage a war that will be pitiless.

    1. Does he mean it? Or is he just killing time until Obama and Cameron and Merkel and Justin Trudeau and Malcolm Turnbull fly in and they can all get back to talking about sea levels in the Maldives in the 22nd century? By which time France and Germany and Belgium and Austria and the Netherlands will have been long washed away.

      Among his other coy evasions, President Obama described tonight's events as "an attack not just on Paris, it's an attack not just on the people of France, but this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share".

      But that's not true, is it? He's right that it's an attack not just on Paris or France. What it is is an attack on the west, on the civilization that built the modern world - an attack on one portion of "humanity" by those who claim to speak for another portion of "humanity". And these are not "universal values" but values that spring from a relatively narrow segment of humanity. They were kinda sorta "universal" when the great powers were willing to enforce them around the world and the colonial subjects of ramshackle backwaters such as Aden, Sudan and the North-West Frontier Province were at least obliged to pay lip service to them. But the European empires retreated from the world, and those "universal values" are utterly alien to large parts of the map today.

      And then Europe decided to invite millions of Muslims to settle in their countries. Most of those people don't want to participate actively in bringing about the death of diners and concertgoers and soccer fans, but at a certain level most of them either wish or are indifferent to the death of the societies in which they live - modern, pluralist, western societies and those "universal values" of which Barack Obama bleats. So, if you are either an active ISIS recruit or just a guy who's been fired up by social media, you have a very large comfort zone in which to swim, and which the authorities find almost impossible to penetrate.

      And all Chancellor Merkel and the EU want to do is make that large comfort zone even larger by letting millions more "Syrian" "refugees" walk into the Continent and settle wherever they want. As I wrote after the Copenhagen attacks in February:

    2. I would like to ask Mr Cameron and Miss Thorning-Schmidt what's their happy ending here? What's their roadmap for fewer "acts of violence" in the years ahead? Or are they riding on a wing and a prayer that they can manage the situation and hold it down to what cynical British civil servants used to call during the Irish "Troubles" "an acceptable level of violence"? In Pakistan and Nigeria, the citizenry are expected to live with the reality that every so often Boko Haram will kick open the door of the schoolhouse and kidnap your daughters for sex-slavery or the Taliban will gun down your kids and behead their teacher in front of the class. And it's all entirely "random", as President Obama would say, so you just have to put up with it once in a while, and it's tough if it's your kid, but that's just the way it is. If we're being honest here, isn't that all Mr Cameron and Miss Thorning-Schmidt are offering their citizens? Spasms of violence as a routine feature of life, but don't worry, we'll do our best to contain it - and you can help mitigate it by not going to "controversial" art events, or synagogues, or gay bars, or...

      ...or soccer matches, or concerts, or restaurants...

      To repeat what I said a few days ago, I'm Islamed out. I'm tired of Islam 24/7, at Colorado colleges, Marseilles synagogues, Sydney coffee shops, day after day after day. The west cannot win this thing with a schizophrenic strategy of targeting things and people but not targeting the ideology, of intervening ineffectually overseas and not intervening at all when it comes to the remorseless Islamization and self-segregation of large segments of their own countries.

      So I say again: What's the happy ending here? Because if M Hollande isn't prepared to end mass Muslim immigration to France and Europe, then his "pitiless war" isn't serious. And, if they're still willing to tolerate Mutti Merkel's mad plan to reverse Germany's demographic death spiral through fast-track Islamization, then Europeans aren't serious. In the end, the decadence of Merkel, Hollande, Cameron and the rest of the fin de civilisation western leadership will cost you your world and everything you love.

      So screw the candlelight vigil.

      ~I'll be talking about events in Paris on Fox & Friends Saturday morning at around 9am Eastern/6am Pacific.

  34. Why would I get my panties in a wad over a shooting in France, when we lose 32,000 Americans / Year to Gun Deaths.

    1. That's equivalent to one of these attacks almost every day.

      Why aren't you all getting all excited about that?

    2. Because it's a different topic altogether.

      We lose 30 some thousand to car deaths, 40 some thousand to overdoses.

      You said once, without the 2nd Amendment, we got nothing.

      The 2nd Amendment might come in handy when the muzz make a terrorist attack here, as they will, sooner or later.

    3. If you are interested see: John Lott 'More Guns, Less Crime'

      "An armed bar is a polite bar" -

      a good quote I remember Deuce making.

    4. And, 158 dead and many wounded is not just "a shooting in France".


  35. Why Paris Happened
    by Roger L Simon
    NOVEMBER 14, 2015 - 1:39 AM

    I am not going to blame Barack Obama entirely for what happened in Paris Friday — but mostly. And that’s not just because he famously called ISIS the jayvee team, when they are now unequivocally the New York Yankees or the Manchester United of terror, repellent as that analogy may be (he started it).

    But what is clear from the carnage at The Bataclan theatre and elsewhere in Paris that we will be studying for weeks or months to come is that the West has no leader in our evident civilizational war — no Churchill, no Roosevelt, no de Gaulle, not even a George W. Bush. It’s certainly not Barack Obama, a ludicrous man who thinks the world’s greatest problem is climate change in the face of Islamic terror. This is the same man who oversaw, indeed instigated, a large-scale American démarche for the first time since World War II.

    And look what happened. Well, we all know. We are living at a time when the Islamic world is having a nervous breakdown, actually more like a violent psychotic break, in its encounter with modernity and is determined to bring us all down with it.

    Something must be done, but by whom? (As I write this, Paris is under mandatory curfew, the nation’s borders sealed. Are we next?) America, once the country everyone turned to, needs someone serious at its helm never more than now. The world needs it. But who is it?

    Hillary Clinton, the sleazy liar and confidant of the even sleazier Sidney Blumenthal, the woman Donald Trump was correct in alleging is running for president at least in part to stay out of jail? Doesn’t that sound reassuring?

    What about Trump himself?....................

  36. The French have been fucking with the Arabs for hundreds of years. They spent the entire 20th Century occupying Arab lands (see: Algeria, Chad, etc.) and stealing their oil. Their planes are bombing in Iraq, Today.

    Now, some young men are killing some Frenchmen. And, I'm supposed to give a shit? Sorry, it ain't happening.

    1. And the arabs have been fucking with the everyone for 3000 years.

      Why do you limit your mentality to the interference of the west in modern history only?

  37. galopn2Sat Nov 14, 11:33:00 AM EST
    Am I the only one that doesn't really give a fuck that some people got killed in France?

    Rufus, I will give you that you are consistent .

    You don't give a fuck when Jews are butchered, now French...

    Do you give a crap when American Jews are butchered? Oh, you already answered, NO...

    So who do you specifically care about?

    1. Raises hand -

      I know the answer to that ! !

      Clan Rufus !

      He has said that many many times.

      And of the Clan Rufus, Rufus first of all.

      He has said that, too.

  38. Ann Coulter is thinking The Donald was elected President of the USA yesterday.


    1. POLL: TRUMP SURGES TO 42%...............Drudge

      Among Republican primary voters.


    2. Ann Coulter on Paris Attack: ‘Donald Trump Was Elected President Tonight’
      by Josh Feldman | 9:58 pm, November 13th, 2015

      Ann Coulter reacted to the Paris terrorist attack tonight by declaring “no more Muslim immigration” and touting Donald Trump on that particular issue.

      In a string of tweets tonight, Coulter said that the obvious answer to stopping terrorism in the United States is to “stop importing Muslims”.............

    3. Makes sense to me.

      4 million Syrians refuges makes zero sense to me.

  39. Arab slave trade was the practice of slavery in the Arab world, mainly in Western Asia, North Africa, Southeast Africa, the Horn of Africa and certain parts of Europe (such as Iberia and Sicily) beginning during the era of the Muslim conquests and continuing into the early second half of the 20th century.[1] The trade was conducted through slave markets in the Middle East, North Africa and the Horn of Africa, with the slaves captured mostly from Africa's interior.

    During the 8th and 9th centuries of the Fatimid Caliphate, most of those enslaved were Saqaliba Europeans captured during wars and along European coastlines.[2][page needed] Historians estimate that between 650 and the 1960s, 10 to 18 million people were enslaved by Arab slave traders and taken from Europe, Asia and Africa across the Red Sea, Indian Ocean, and Sahara desert.

  40. Rufus, how did the arabs spread to north africa?

    1. Did the arabs or moslems "fuck with" the europeans?

      Hmmm Can you say "crusades"...

      Who invaded who rufus?

      You might be surprised if you took a moment to learn...

    2. Rufus have you ever heard of Constantinople?

    3. I know the answer to that, too.

      Through the sword.

  41. All the right-wing crazies are on television screaming, "What are we going to do about this? What?!?"

    The answer, of course, should be, "Nothing."

    It was France that was attacked, Not us. Let Them do something, if they want.

    Let them support the MIC for awhile.

  42. Amazing and yet when you read your statements in support of Hamas?

    It's such a juxtaposition.


  43. MUSLIM RAMPAGE: 129 DEAD; 352 HURT...
    Three teams of attackers...
    High level of sophistication...
    Suicide bomber had ticket into stadium...
    LE PEN: France must 'annihilate' Islamist radicals...
    Anxiety grows over ISIS recruits in USA...

    PARIS TERRORISTS 'REFUGEES' ................Drudge

    I am going into Vandal Booster Meditation at this time in preparation for the Idaho game in one hour.

    Vandal Fans : note

    Quirk has judged us all, all 12 of us, to be of 'sterling character'.

    It came about this way......I was saying my sterling character was developed by boosting the Vandals all these years, and Quirk affirmatively said yes, all 12 of you.

    Vandal Fans - those of sterling character!!

    1. but it's hard to win by punting

    2. We may end up in the Big Sky Conference next year....

    3. grrrr....holding by the Vandals in the end zone after a wonderful A.S. punt........

      Appalachian State 37
      Idaho 13

      Idaho free kick to A.S.

      This game is decided....just the final score remains to be seen

    4. Next week away at Auburn, then Home at the Dome for the final season game against Texas State, and the misery is over for this year, Vandal Sterling Fans !

      Boosting The Vandals Builds Sterling Character

  44. We hit ISIS with 27 Airstrikes, yesterday; including 9 in and around Ramadi.


  45. The Migrant Jihad Has Begun in Paris

    At least one jihad attacker was a “refugee.” Will European leaders reconsider their migrant policy?
    November 14, 2015
    Robert Spencer

    That didn’t take long: one of the Islamic State (ISIS) jihadis who murdered at least 160 people in Paris on Friday held a Syrian passport and passed through Greece in October. In October, he was a “refugee” seeking asylum in Europe from the Syrian war zone; in November, he was murdering French civilians for the Islamic caliphate. The Migrant Jihad has begun.

    French and European authorities can’t say they weren’t warned. Last February, the Islamic State boasted it would soon flood Europe with as many as 500,000 refugees. And the Lebanese Education Minister recently said that there were 20,000 jihadis among the refugees in camps in his country. Meanwhile, 80% of migrants who have recently come to Europe claiming to be fleeing the war in Syria aren’t really from Syria at all.

    So why are they claiming to be Syrian and streaming into Europe? An Islamic State operative gave the answer when he boasted in September, shortly after the migrant influx began, that among the flood of refugees, 4,000 Islamic State jihadis had already entered Europe. He explained their purpose: “It’s our dream that there should be a caliphate not only in Syria but in all the world, and we will have it soon, inshallah.” These Muslims were going to Europe in the service of that caliphate: “They are going like refugees,” he said, but they were going with the plan of sowing blood and mayhem on European streets. As he told this to journalists, he smiled and said, “Just wait.”

    A year before that the Islamic State issued a call for jihad murders of French civilians: “If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be.”

    Then after the attacks the Islamic State issued a statement claiming responsibility for them, and warning: “Let France and all nations following its path know that they will continue to be at the top of the target list for the Islamic State and that the scent of death will not leave their nostrils as long as they partake in the crusader campaign, as long as they dare to curse our Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him), and as long as they boast about their war against Islam in France and their strikes against Muslims in the land of the Caliphate with their jets, which were of no avail to them in the filthy streets and alleys of Paris. Indeed, this is just the beginning. It is also a warning for any who wish to take heed.”

    1. So war was declared, and acts of war carried out – and the response has been drearily predictable. German Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere was swift to try to dissociate the Paris attacks from the migrant influx into Europe: “I would like to make this urgent plea to avoid drawing such swift links to the situation surrounding refugees.” Alas for de Maiziere, there was the inconvenient fact of that Syrian “refugee” who pass through Greece on his way to jihad in Paris.

      Meanwhile, Barack Obama was true to form, not mentioning Islam or Muslims in his statement on the Paris attacks, and not giving a hint that it was his precipitous and politically motivated withdrawal from Iraq that created the vacuum that allowed for the rise of the Islamic State. Indeed, the Islamic State could end up being the most significant legacy of the Obama Administration. Obviously American troops couldn’t have stayed in Iraq forever, and the Iraq project from its beginnings was based on false assumptions about Islam, ignoring its political, supremacist and violent aspects; but Obama’s hasty and ill-thought out withdrawal took into account none of the realities on the ground: the Sunni/Shi’ite divide, the Iranian influence in Baghdad, the Sunnis’ unwillingness to participate in the Baghdad government and the Shi’ites’ refusal to allow them to do so in any significant way, and more. France today is paying the price for the willful ignorance and short-sightedness of Obama and his administration.

      The Leftist media is firmly stuck in willful ignorance mode as well. Salon published a piece entitled, “Our terrorism double standard: After Paris, let’s stop blaming Muslims and take a hard look at ourselves,” and another entitled, “And so the hate speech begins: Let Paris be the end of the right’s violent language toward activists.” The Guardian worried that after the Paris jihad murders Friday, “far-right groups may well fuel more hatred.” Neither Salon nor the Guardian, nor any other mainstream media outlet, published any realistic assessment of the advancing jihad threat in France and the West in general.

      And so as the Western intelligentsia fell into familiar patterns of response, it only ensured that there would be many, many more attacks, in Europe and the U.S., like the one in Paris Friday. It seems as if no amount of disconfirming evidence will move the establishment Left to remove its blinkers, discard its politically correct fantasies, and face the jihad threat realistically. The Leftists in the corridors of power are today ensuring that there will be much, much more bloodshed.

  46. Isis would never have evolved without the disruption strategy fostered by the neocons and initiated by the US and UK.

    There is no single ME power capable of destroying ISIS. There are manipulators and enablers that have encouraged ISIS, the Turks and Saudis lead the list.

    It should have been obvious from the beginning that ISIS was different, dangerous and had a unique appeal to the true believers.

    ISIS must be destroyed from the roots on up. The US, Russia, Iran, Syria, Iraq, Kurds and Hezbollah have the ability , the potential coalition and the motivation to destroy ISIS.

    Turkey, Israel, and the Saudis are useless to the cause and should be dumped.

    We have no other choice.

  47. It HAS to be done with local forces on the ground, and that makes it hard.

    I posted, last night, that the freakin' Kurds, and Turkmen are fighting.

    The first time the Kurds tried to take back Sinjar, they had plenty of people, and support, but they ended up in a big fight amongst themselves, and the Iraqi Kurds walked off the battlefield.

    This shit goes on, constantly. And, yet, any grownup will tell you that these are the people that we have to use.

    (and, the good news is, Sinjar did, finally, get "taken," and eventually Ramadi, Mosul, and the rest will, as well.)

  48. We need to make a deal with Iran, and Russia, to help with ISIS in return for a "hands-off" on Assad, and a big, fat "blow-me" to Bibi.

    Assad hasn't ever done a damned thing to us, and busting up that country just for Bibi's shits and grins is despicable.

    1. It absolutely is. The whole farce is designed for Israel to be able to expand its borders Northward - Lebanon, and, one would assume, parts of Syria.

      It's an idiot plan, and will only cost us more grief than the considerable amount that we've suffered, already.

    2. Wow, Israel is expanding north into lebanon and east into syria??

      News to me and I have a "red phone" you know...

      Hey Rufus, I guess you really are quite the geopolitical genius. You and Skippy peanut butter... fighting it out...

  49. Israel has had nothing to do with it.

    Listening to the Vandals is more interesting than listening to Rufus, even if they are losing.

    1. The Zionists have been working to destabilize the Middle East since the 1980's, they wrote about it.

      This is what Oden Yinon had to declare about Iraq:
      «Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shiite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north».

      Syria is bloodletting even more than Iraq.

      Israeli and American analysts, experts, and policymakers keep insisting that the country will fall apart.
      The foreign-sponsored anti-government forces are killing civilians on the basis of their community affiliations as a means of spreading sedition and hate.

      Harking back to Israel’s Yinon Plan, it states:
      «The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unqiue areas such as in Lebanon,
      is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run,
      while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target.

      Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shiite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northern Jordan»

      Mr Oren, the Israeli ambassador to the United States made it perfectly clear, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson

      Israel prefers Daesh (al-Qeada) in Syria, over the Alawites, Christians and their Kurdish allies

      Israel’s Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren told the Jerusalem Post that Israel so wanted Assad out and his Iranian backers weakened, that Israel would accept al-Qaeda operatives taking power in Syria.

      “We always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren’t backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran.”
      Even if the other “bad guys” were affiliated with al-Qaeda.

    2. AH Mr "cut and paste" is back.

      What no wi-fi when running guns and pot south of the border? Or were you just doing some "wet ops" like you used to brag about?

      How was the killing?

      Is your "group" ISIS or Hezbollah affiliated?

      Yes the FAMOUS "desert rat" is back...

      Better alert the AZ FBI you are back, maybe they can track your IP?

    3. It sure was nice around here while he was 'away'.

    4. That's okay, Rat; I missed you. I hope you've been well. :)

    5. /

      No poster on this blog, has been more correct than DR.

    6. So says the cheerleader for russia, hamas, iran and hezbollah...

      so that's not saying much.

  50. November 14, 2015
    The names of the people responsible for the massacres in France
    By Ed Straker

    The names of the people responsible for the massacres in France are as follows:

    1) François Hollande, president of France

    2) Angela Merkel, prime minister of Germany

    3) David Cameron, prime minister of the U.K.

    4) Stefan Lofven, prime minister of Sweden well as most of the other prime ministers and European heads of state. Oh, and we must include the pope, too, who insistently called on Europe to take in more Muslim refugees.

    All these people -- and their predecessors in office -- have the blood of the dead French citizens, and the other victims of radical Islam, on their hands. They willingly and knowingly have imported millions of Muslims from barbaric Middle Eastern cultures. They knew that many were military-age young men. They knew that a substantial minority of them were supporters of radical Islam.

    And then, when the unthinkable occurs, they act surprised and outraged and vow to secure their borders. Well, it's a little too late for that now, isn't it?

    If a zookeeper opens a lion cage and lets the lion wander outside, and the lion mauls some animal rights activists, you might blame the lion. But it's the zookeeper who really bears the most blame, because the zookeeper should have known better.

    Just as George W. Bush is indirectly responsible for the deaths and maimings at the Boston Marathon by letting the Muslim extremists who perpetrated the act into the country, so are these European leaders responsible for the carnage that has happened.

    Many of these people are not even refugees. Some are not even from Syria. Syrian refugees who are Sunni should be taken in by the Arab Gulf states, who have plenty of land and money to support them with. Syrian refugees who are Shi'ite should move to government-controlled areas or Iran. There is no need for them to bring their radical ideology to Europe, no need for all these Europeans to die.

    It's especially imperative that Republicans don't nominate someone like Jeb Bush, who calls for letting more of these potential killers in, or Marco Rubio, who says he wants more once they are "vetted," an impossibility when people are coming from a destroyed country with no records.

    I feel sorry for the French dead, but Europeans, at least a majority of them, voted for the policies that led to this by electing these leaders.

  51. Deuce-I'm an advocate for pragmatism

    "The two points central to the pragmatist ethics are: a formal rejection of all fixed standards—and an unquestioning absorption of the prevailing standards. The same two points constitute the pragmatist approach to politics, which, developed most influentially by Dewey, became the philosophy of the Progressive movement in this country (and of most of its liberal descendants down to the present day)".

    Does that definition fit you Deuce?

    1. More or less.

      We live three generations at a time. (if we are lucky). No generation should be either a slave to past generations or indebted to a utopian view of the future, or we would all be burning witches and bloodletting bad humors. Given the choice between pragmatism and a dogmatic enslavement to the past, i’ll settle for pragmatism.

    2. "The pragmatists present themselves as the exponents of a distinctively “American” approach, which consists in enshrining the basic premises of [German philosophy] while rejecting every fundamental idea, from metaphysics to politics, on which this country was founded. Most important of all, the Americans wanted ideas to be good for something on earth, to have tangible, practical significance; and, insistently, the pragmatists stress “practicality,” which, according to their teachings, consists in action divorced from thought and reality."

      So you're not really a Libertarian?

    3. ...and a dogmatic enslavement to the past,...

      On that I would agree with you insofar as the past theories and theological arguments were proven wrong. But my experience in depression and then being cured in a split second, as I relayed to the bar awhile ago, prove the New Testament to me.

  52. a formal rejection of all fixed standards—and an unquestioning absorption of the prevailing standards

    Good grief. I don't know what to make of that.

    Rejecting 'fixed standards' - what are they, shouldn't we know what we are rejecting ?

    and an unquestioning absorption of the prevailing standards

    Good grief once again. What the prevailing standards might be surely is of some importance. We shouldn't absorb anything unquestioningly.

    William James had a standard - 'fruits for life'.

    You judge a philosophy or a religion or a political party by its 'fruits for life'.

    By this standard Islam fails utterly.

    1. .

      Like most philosophical concepts pragmatism is a load of crap.

      It requires someone to determine what is practical and in the end that decision maker may not be that practical after all.


  53. Reading about the big Dem debate between The Bern, Hillary and what'shisname -O'Malley ?-

    The Bern seems to have claimed that 'climate change' is the cause of terrorism.

    I'm not kidding, that's what the bloggers are saying.


    1. Sanders: climate change is causing terrorism.


      WisCon on November 14, 2015 at 9:13 PM

      I don’t know who this O’mallahan fella is, but I like the cut of his jib.

      Buckshot Bill on November 14, 2015 at 9:13 PM

      GWB should jump out and say boo , watch her have heart attack

      djohn669 on November 14, 2015 at 9:13 PM

      roflmao…no no it’s Climate Change…OMG Bernie

      CoffeeLover on November 14, 2015 at 9:13 PM

      Good lord! Sander: Climate change directly led to ISIS.


      smokeyblonde on November 14, 2015 at 9:13 PM

    2. The only one in this debate with a working brain is Hillary, and she's a criminal.

  54. galopn2Sat Nov 14, 07:07:00 PM EST
    We need to make a deal with Iran, and Russia, to help with ISIS in return for a "hands-off" on Assad, and a big, fat "blow-me" to Bibi.

    Assad hasn't ever done a damned thing to us, and busting up that country just for Bibi's shits and grins is despicable.

    Denial aint just a river in egypt...

    But as for your idea to keep Assad murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians with hezbollah, iran and russia's help?


  55. We need to whup climate change or we can't whup the terrorists -

    At Democratic Debate, Bernie Sanders Says Climate Change Helps Terrorism Spread
    By Julia Glum @superjulia on November 14 2015 9:39 PM EST

    Democratic U.S. presidential candidates (from left) Sen. Bernie Sanders, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley participate in a debate in Des Moines, Iowa, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2015. Reuters

    One day after the Islamic State group killed or injured about 500 people in a series of attacks in Paris, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., linked climate change to the spread of terrorist groups overseas. At the second Democratic presidential debate, held Saturday in Des Moines, Iowa, Sanders was asked whether he stood by his previous claims that climate change was the No. 1 threat to national security. He said he did.

    "Climate change is directly related to the rise of global terrorism," Sanders said.............

    1. "directly related"

      Quirk can't wiggle Bernie's way out of that.

  56. Comment on another Debate Thread:

    I’m undecided between Dems and Repubs.

    The three Democrats are pretty sharp, but I like what that Carson fellow said about stabbing his mother.

  57. :)


    I really do think Bernie is a little nuts. There's a tuna sandwich and some potato salad missing from his picnic basket.

    Climate change causes terrorism.

    How in the hell did he put those two together ? Has he researched it ? Was there a solar maximum at the time of the fall of Constantinople in 1453 ? or what ?

    We need Quirk to look into this one, to see if there is really a causation here, a correlation, a coincidence, or just what.

    We need to know if there really is any climate change too, and we don't even know that.

    Calling Quirk, the expert on causation.


    Sounds like

    1) They put everybody to sleep


    2) They couldn't stand the embarrassment any longer and pulled the plug

  59. Bernie's solution to terrorism: air conditioners

  60. Diplomats Invoke Plan For Joint Action In Syria

    APBy George Jahn and Matthew Lee

    Posted: 11/14/2015 03:12 PM EST

    VIENNA (AP) — Invoking the need for joint action after the terrorist attacks on Paris, foreign ministers of nearly 20 nations agreed Saturday to an ambitious yet incomplete plan for bringing peace to Syria and ending its role as a breeding ground for ISIS and other radical Islamic groups.

    Countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, which support different sides in the conflict, put aside their dispute to condemn the bombings and shootings that left at least 123 people in the French capital dead Friday. So did Moscow and Washington.

    Standing next to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov ahead of Saturday's full ministerial meeting, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry called the attacks "the most vile, horrendous, outrageous, unacceptable acts on the planet". He said they "encouraged us today to do even harder work to make progress and to help resolve the crises that we face."

    "The events in Paris underscore the threat that Daesh poses to all of us," he later told reporters, referring by an alternate name to ISIS, which claimed responsibility for the Paris terror spree. Kerry spoke in French for part of his post-meeting remarks, in a bow to the victims of those attacks.

    Lavrov said there was "no justification for terrorist acts, and no justification for us not doing much more to defeat ISIS and al Nusra and the like," adding: "I hope that this meeting as well would allow us to move forward."

    The plan presented by the two appeared to draw heavily on a recently circulated Russian initiative. With just two weeks elapsed since the Syria talks first convened, it could mark a significant advance, if successful.

    It sets a Jan. 1 deadline for the start of negotiations between President Bashar Assad's government and opposition groups. Lavrov said the Syrian government already had put forward its representatives, with the U.N. special envoy for Syria, Staffan de Mistura, to begin immediate work on determining who should sit at the table as part of the opposition team.

    Within six months, the negotiations between the Syrian sides are to establish "credible, inclusive and non-sectarian" transitional government that would set a schedule for drafting a new constitution and holding a free and fair U.N.-supervised election within 18 months, according to a joint statement released by the United Nations on behalf of the 19 parties to the talks.

    But holes remained.

    While the diplomats agreed on a U.N.-administered cease fire enforcement mechanism they failed to reach consensus on which groups other than the Islamic State and al-Qaida affiliates would not be eligible for the truce. Under the terms, the sponsoring countries of each group covered by the cease fire would be responsible for making sure that group upholds it.

    Lavrov said Jordan would oversee a process that would identify which groups should be considered for identification as terrorists. That is to be completed by the time the political process between the government and opposition begins in January.

    Comments from the two also reflected continued differences on the causes of the terrorist threat emanating from Syria. Kerry suggested radicals were drawn to the country in their fight against Assad, a view Lavrov disputed. U.S.-Russian disputes on what, if any role, Assad should play in any transition remained, although both men played them down as they focused on the progress made.

    Washington wants Assad removed, but Kerry suggested Syrians themselves would decide the fate of the Syrian president through the democratic process.

    1. "We did not come here to impose our collective will on the Syrian people, exactly the opposite," he told reporters at the end of the talks. "The Syrian people will be and must be the validators of our efforts."

      While "we still differ on the issue of what happens with Bashar al Assad ... we do agree to this: It is time for the bleeding in Syria to stop, it is time to deprive the terrorists of any single kilometer in which to hide.""

      At the same time, Kerry said the war "can't end as long as Bashar Assad is there. That's the perception of the people waging the war."

      But Lavrov said the conflict — or its solution — is "not about Assad."

      "It doesn't matter if you are for Assad or against him," he said. "ISIS is your enemy."

      Now in its 5th year, the war has killed more than 250,000 people. It has left 11 million uprooted from their homes, while allowing Islamic State militants to carve out significant parts of Syria and Iraq for their would-be caliphate. Europe and Syria's neighbors, meanwhile, are struggling to cope with the worst migrant crisis since World War II.

      As the meeting wrapped up, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged ministers "to move beyond their differences on Syria." French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said the attacks in Paris made it all the more necessary for the international community to find a common approach in Syria and terrorism, sentiments echoed by the foreign ministers of Germany, Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

      Jordan's foreign minister, Nasser Judeh, said the Paris attack "reaffirms our collective commitment" to fight terror and extremism wherever it may occur, while EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said no one could turn away from the common threat.

      "We are together in this: Europeans, Arabs, East and West, all the international community," she declared. "The best response to this is actually coming together, overcoming our differences, and trying together to lead the way towards peace in Syria."

      In a decision apparently prompted by the Paris attacks, the participants also chose the French capital for their next meeting before year's end to go over progress made toward the cease fire and the selection of delegations for the political talks.