« Bastards | Main | Notice »

Meeting Despair At The Corner

I am incredibly despondent right now. I am also very angry. That is not a good combination. I am rounding a dangerous corner, one I've been approaching since Nick Berg's head was sliced off like that of an animal. Oh, hell. I've been approaching it since before that. I've probably crawled a bit closer every time a school bus exploded in Israel. What do we do? How do we stop this? Right now, in my anger, I want to go to war with the entire Middle East, save Israel. I want to annihilate them. I know it is unreasonable and I know it isn't right. I know it's a horrible thought, but it's there, at the tip of my brain, trying to get me to shout it out to the world. Kill. Them. All. In an hour or so I might feel different. I might not. The residual anger over Nick Berg stayed with me a for a while. Each time something like this happens, the anger dissipates slower and leaves a shadow behind. How long before the shadow is all that's left? I do not blame America. I do not blame George Bush. I blame people who have taken a religion and distorted, warped and molded it to fit their own homicidal, ugly needs. They have bloodlust. And that bloodlust has been handed down from father to son, and the resulting butchery of Islam is handed from mother to daughter and murder and justified barbarism goes on and on. I do not blame Bush, just as I do not blame Clinton, Bush I or Carter. I do not blame America. But that is what they want and by telling you that their cause in murdering Nick Berg and Paul Johnson, among many others, has anything to do with Iraq they are force feeding you the lie that America is to blame. Some of you are eating that crap up like it's a decadent dessert. Spit it out. It's poison. They want you to believe that they really care about Abu Ghraib. They don't. It's just an excuse to get you to hate yourself the way they hate you. You should all be taking this very personally. Because it was personal. They would kill you just as swiftly as they killed Paul Johnson. I know I am not rounding this corner alone. We're an angry mob, aren't we? And quite helpless, which makes us despair even more. I'm going to repeat what I wrote yesterday and I'll repeat it every day if I feel it's needed: Wake up, America. Just wake the hell up.

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Meeting Despair At The Corner:

» BULLETIN: Saudi Militants Behead Hostage Johnson from Dean's World
(This is a good chunk of the initial story. We will run more updates later in the day.) As expected, American hostage Paul Johnson, Jr.... [Read More]

» THESE PEOPLE HAVE NO MERCY from The Galvin Opinion
We cannot shrink in fear from terrorism. For decades now, we have sought the short-term solutions in an attempt to stave off facing what is a disgustingly evil scourge on this planet. Now, America is not giving in. We must not, we can not, forego the... [Read More]

» How Much Are You Willing To Tolerate? from Rodent Regatta
I'm entirely prepared, willing and able to become the "ugly American" once more. This stuff must stop. It must stop.... [Read More]

» How Much Are You Willing To Tolerate? from Rodent Regatta
I'm entirely prepared, willing and able to become the "ugly American" once more. This stuff must stop. It must stop.... [Read More]

» Pardon me while I rant. from On The Third Hand
The terrorists beheaded another American, Paul Johnson, this time in Saudi Arabia, and we are going to do nothing except talk about it. Meanwhile, we'll keep apologizing for prison abuse committed by a small number of people (who are being prosecuted)... [Read More]

» Wake up, America. Just wake the hell up. from Babalu Blog
I feel just like this right about now.... [Read More]

» It’s Poison from Derek’s Weblog
Michele wakes us up: “Spit it out. It’s poison.” [Read More]

» So now there's rage from the True Nature of Reality
Another American had his head sawed off today. May God rest and keep him. For the rest of us, there's rage. Rage on Fox News, deep concern in the rest of the media, rage on the blogosphere. Certainly rage among... [Read More]

» Another Beheading Video from Backcountry Conservative
Steven Taylor reports that MSNBC and CNN are saying Paul Johnson has been beheaded, per al Arabiya. UPDATE: Fox News also reports that Johnson has been killed (via The Command Post.) James Joyner has more. Northeast Intelligence Network reports they... [Read More]

» Posted Without Further Linkage from dcthornton.com
This is a snuff-free post. Atrocity tourists should get their jollies elsewhere. [Read More]

» The War on Terror spreads from Arguing with signposts...
I have a question: Did anyone think that terrorism would just "go away" if we took out the Taliban in Afghanistan? I mean, was anyone under an illusion that Saudi Arabia wouldn't come into play at some point? Was anyone... [Read More]

» They are what they are do deal with it! from The S-Train Canvas
Another American civilian has been killed in the Middle East. The linked story tells it all, I don't have to... [Read More]

» Paul Johnson Beheading from Slant Point
UPDATE: Some other bloggers on this atrocity: WizBang, Dean's World, Vodka Pundit, A Small Victory, Spot On, IMAO - while the Commissar at Politburo Diktat rails us all for giving free air time to the terrorists over this whole incident. ORIGINAL POST:... [Read More]

» I Don't Think You Heard Me from JimSpot
Michele is catching flack for a post about all-out war on the Middle East, which I thought was worded quite... [Read More]

» Paul Johnson Beheading from Slant Point
UPDATE: Some other bloggers on this atrocity: WizBang, Dean's World, Vodka Pundit, A Small Victory, Spot On, IMAO - while the Commissar at Politburo Diktat rails us all for giving free air time to the terrorists over this whole incident. ORIGINAL POST:... [Read More]

» cheap airfare from cheap airfare
Some cheapes airfare sites! [Read More]

Comments

i blame bush AND his religion. he and HIS religion have a bloodlust. A BLOODLUST WHICH HAS BEEN HANDED DOWN FROM FATHER TO SON... the resulting butchering of christianity is handed down from mother to daughter and murder and justified bararism goes on and on.

it's assholes like you who create this madness. your racism, your hatred...
Mr. Johnson's death was unacceptable, was barbaric, but your blind hatred... even more so...

hatred begets hatred...

We will hear the assholes who say that we caused this. We have to be ready to hear from them, because they'll be there.

Then we have to remind everybody what it is we're facing.

Exactly, Michele.

Me, I'm rapidly approaching apathy towards the lives of everyone in the middle east save Israel. I see another beheading, and my thought is "You want war? We'll GIVE you war."

And "bleedingheartliberal," shut up. I'm personally not in the mood for it.

bleedingheartliberal,

Fuck you.

Welcome to some more hatred - mine for you. The cycle continues, I suppose.

Sorry to sully this thread with a non-response. Maybe I should be banned. I can't even remain calm enough to formulate an intelligent response. Sorry.

YES.

Al Qaeda wants to hurt us, and they have found another way to do it using our own mistakes against us.

Abu Ghraib is their touchstone, the thing they can use to make us believe that every American death is payment for it. When in fact, they flew planes into our buildings and blew a hole in a US ship and countless other things long before Abu Ghraib, and simply because they hate us and what we stand for.

"What do we do? How do we stop this? Right now, in my anger, I want to go to war with the entire Middle East, save Israel. I want to annihilate them"

That exactly the reaction they want from every American.

We can shout from the rooftops, but sadly, I don't think it's going to happen; Americans don't pay attention to deaths unless it happens on American soil. Then they are outraged!

What have I been saying?
I'm not such a biggot now huh.
You are either part of the problem or the solution.
In jmy previous comments I said I would put them in a near vegatative state and send them home.
I don't care about soddomy with a light. I can be a lot more creative than that.

Geez I'm so mad my typing is worse then ever.

Do not be despondent. Do be very angry.
They are the animals. Or at least the
lowest form of humanity.

What we do is persevere. We continue to
do what we know is right. Unfortunately
for all of us, there is a time for
killing. We must do it judiciously, and
as a last resort. That seperates us from
them.

It is important not just to not blame
America. You must support her when she
is right. You must opose her detracters
when they are wrong.

Choose your side, voice your opinions,
and ignore the critics.

And remember, we are not helpless.
We have each other.

Don't these people get it? We COULD wipe out the entire region, but we don't. Why? Because we Christians (and atheists and agnostics and Jews and Moderate Muslims and Scientologists, etc.) with "bloodlust" don't act immediate on our visceral feelings. We voice it, but our cooler heads prevail. Maybe the Middle East could learn from us?

Rage, but don't despair. Although you'd never know it from the defeatist drone of the media, America proper has more than enough will and ability to win this war. And, not just because of who we are but also because we want to win, our men are going to do it without leveling the Middle East even at the risk of their own lives.

As always, Bill Whittle is a good antidote for despair. What he said about Fallujah applies here:

"We ran from Fallujah, we hear; those murdering bastards are laughing at us. We’re not tough enough to win. Uh, not quite. Hundreds of those murdering bastards are dead. They are not laughing at anything.

The Fallujah bridge pissed off a lot of Americans. It really made us see red. Would we be disgusted enough to walk away, or furious enough to go in and indiscriminately slaughter thousands? The architects of that atrocity must have thought they nailed that perfect tic-tac-toe move: we go one way, they win on the other. Quoth Den Beste: the object of Terrorism is to provoke an overwhelming response. And the response to that response is the political and strategic goal of the terrorist.

Al Sadr, you less than magnificent bastard! We read your book!

Blah, blah…war is lost…blah blah blah... disaster, wreck and ruin… Only it turns out that the United States military may have produced a few life-long professionals who actually hold victory more precious than crowing loud. Many of us value reason over emotion, and reality over wishful thinking. Well, we did not level Fallujah, and we did not do it because those bodies on that bridge were bait, pure and simple. We didn’t take the bait. Or, I should say, our military didn’t take the bait; I took it, hook line and sinker. I wanted to level the goddam city and then walk away and let them kill each other. Now, as Al Sadr’s support evaporates; as his militia thugs are being hunted and killed by shadowy Iraqi ghost armies and extremely corporeal Marines; as his fellow Mullahs condemn him; as Iraqi demonstrations against him and all that poison and ruin he represents continue to rise; as his headquarters are destroyed, his most vicious ‘soldiers’ killed in their own backyards, playing defense in an urban environment by Marines whose skill and tactics stagger credulity for their expertise and success – now, we must ask ourselves: did you want to feel good or did you want to win?

I want to win. I was an idiot for taking that bait. And I thank God daily that America makes better, smarter people than me."

http://www.ejectejecteject.com/archives/000099.html

I'm of the same mindset as you michele. It's getting harder and harder to fight that annihilate the whole area feeling.

I suppose this is a silly question, as it would probably be classified, but do we have an equivalent to that Mossad group of assassins that wiped out almost all of the terrorists involved in the Munich Olympics massacre? Of course secretive groups like that exist in the CIA and our military, but are they actively taking these bastards out??

Individuals like BleedingHeart up there are like a gut wound in this nation. Yeah, its our fault in the same way it is the fault of every victim who is unwilling to defend themselves as aggressively as possible. The attacker is still at fault, and it is THEIR hatred which is the most repugnant, but who here feels anything beyond basic pity for a sheep who refuses to fight back against it's slaughter? We have to start putting our countrymen first. Helping the Iraqis is fine and dandy, but next time there is an aggressive attack against us we need to ramp up the bodycount and damned be anyone between us and our enemies.

I swear I do not care about Abu Ghraib anymore. Who cares if some terrorist scum are humiliated? Actually, I would prefer it if they were just killed, and the ground they lived on salted.

Part of the rage is that we know that the power exists to remove the region. It could be a slowly cooling plate of radioactive glass in less time that it takes to get through a McDonalds drive thru.

There is no acknowledgement from the enemy that they realize this. They are so certain that we'll eventually hate ourselves that they feel immune to the most terrible weapon ever devised.

The rage comes from the possibility that they're right, as I listen to radio DJ's repeat the falsehoods spewed by the press and whine about how tired they are of hearing about Iraq. They don't know we're at war, and they're trying to convince everyone else.

The fact that they beheaded him speaks volumes about the depraved nature of their twisted religion. As civilized Christians, at least we have the decency to beat them to death during interrogation.

I agree with your outrage and also feel despondent. The people who did this are Barbarians.

But, let me politely disagree with some of the conclusions here. The war in Iraq, in its inception, had little to do in the short-term with fighting AQ. If we wanted to deal directly and swiftly with a state that sponsored AQ, we might have chosen to invade Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, or Saudi Arabia. We chose not to for a variety of reasons that are easy enough to surmise.

However, since we've invaded Iraq, the floodgates have opened, not only to AQ, but Iranian militants. Don't be surprised when, in a few months, we end up fighting Iran on Iraqi soil.

We will win the GWOT in either twenty years or four hours. For now we are still pursuing the twenty year approach.

Andy McCarthy says it well on The Corner:

Every time you parade the Abu Ghraib photos, every time you parrot the patently ridiculous pretension by these repulsive murderers that decapitations are motivated by what those photos depict [...] you are guaranteeing that there will be more Daniel Pearls, Nick Bergs and, now, Paul Johnsons. You are telling these monsters that they get a free ride: They get to kill, which they would do anyway, and they get to have you tell the world that the proximate cause of the killing is the U.S. government rather than militant Islam. Scorecard: al Qaeda - win, win; America: lose, lose; Americans: die, die.

BH is full of it, Christ wasn't a soldier, Mohammed was. Islam was spread by the sword deliberately. 1500 years.

That's bloodlust.

Roxanne, if you have DISH, start watching 9410 ME news roundup. Iran knew last year it was on the hit list. And with the stellar negotiating tactics of our European "allies" we're probably going into it sooner than we hoped. That and the kids can't get their act together. No organization.

Every time this happens, I really think we harden on Abu G. Do I really care?

SA has beheading platforms. This is what they do.

Here's a tiny sliver of good news: three of these thugs, including the top Saudi in al Qaeda (Abdulaziz al-Moqrin), won't be killing anyone else anytime soon. I guess their allahu wasn't as akbar as they thought.

Gee, I thought the Iraq war was supposed to REDUCE terrorism.

Instead it has incited MORE of it. Berg and Johnson and over 800 American soldiers and thousands of iraqis would be alive today if it weren't for the invasion and occupation of Iraq, a DIVERSION from the WOT.

Now we have morons who think we should just kill all the Arabs, preferably with those nukes we have just sitting around not doing anything useful. Hell we taxpayers paid for them, why not use them?

Can any of you mouth-breathers explain to me, in rational terms, how mass murder and genocide would make us different from terrorists?

Is it because our imaginary friend in the sky is better than their imaginary friend in the sky?

I thought we were there to LIBERATE them, not ANNIHILATE them.

those of you who talk about killing all the Arabs, are sick.

If you are truly so full of bloodlust, put your money where your mouth is. Go down to the Army recruiting office and sign up. They need all the bodies they can get these days.

You people are fucking morons.

The problem is not the viewing of the photos; it is the torture.

It should not have been done. Nearly all of those who were tortured, were innocent. They were rounded up by those with the same mentality as you have - "one sand-nigger is as good as another, they all look alike to me!"

How do you think Arabs feel when they see this foreign occupier - which they suspect of coming in to steal their oil as has been done so many times in the past by Westerners - come in and humiliate their women and torture their men and kill innocents? Without really much improvement in their lives?

It pisses them off. The average Arab on the street may not have a blog, but they do get together and talk on the street corner and at the market. You know what they say?

The same shit you gibbering morons are saying. "Let's kill them all!"

When we went into Iraq, we chose to punch our fist into a hornet's nest. Why the fuck are you surprised that it gets nasty down there? It should be expected that things like this will happen.

You chickenhawks wanted your war, now you got it. Why aren't you happy? Is your shiny new toy not so much fun anymore?

What else do you expect? You support the worst terrorist country in the world, Israel, then you invade and slaughter people who never did anything to you in addition to torturing them. As you sow, so shall you reap.

Thanks, renato, for a textbook example of everything that's wrong with the anti-war side.

"Mouthbreaters." Check.

Chickenhawk argument. Check.

Snide religious insults. Check.

Untrue generalizations. Check.

Personally, I'm not in the mood today to play with you. Shove a power drill up your ass and turn it on for all I care. And nuke the middle east, for all I care as well.

You too, Mike.

Fucking idiots. It's amazing; An American has had his head sawed off by terrorists, and twits like you STILL have to show up here and play troll. There's something deeply pathetic about you, Mike.

if the shoe fits, BB...

Renato
If we had not liberated Iraq, hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis a year would be dead, and millions would still be tortured, raped, and starved.

American military have protected, defended and liberated more Muslims and Arabs and Iraqis than any country in the world.

You must have forgotten all the kidnappings, killings and bombings perpetuated upon the West by Middle Eastern Arabs over the past twenty-three years. You must have forgotten Saddam's place in the Middle East, he was seen as the Great White Horse who was going to take down the West.

We tried the "placate Islamic fascist and Saddam and the world will be a peaceful place" until 9/11, 2001, when Islamic fascist (from the Middle East, the land where Saddam resided) slammed airplanes into our buildings, killing thousands of innocent lives changed our minds.

So fuck off.

Yeah, fuck you, renato!

Shills like you don't seem to understand the Holy Crusade that our Dear Leader has undertaken: To bring Freedumb® and Dumbakracy® to the heathen infidels in ye land of ye White Mans' Burden.

Only 20-Megatons of nucular righteousness will ever convice those üntermenschen of just how badly we want to cure them of their savage ways.

That's why we're so sooperior to them ignorant savages!

Takes a big man to talk about nuking the Middle East, doesn't it? Or does it? Maybe all it takes is a chickenhawk who can't walk the walk, but sure knows how to shoot his mouth off.

I ask you again: Please explain to me, in rational terms, how nuking the Middle East would make us better than the terrorists.

Please explain to me why we were told over and over we were going to Iraq to liberate the Iraqis, and now you want to kill 'em all.

Please tell me how you will drive to work when the oil fields of the Middle East are useless because someone took your advice and nuked them, and now the oil is useless because it's radioactive.

Can you explain any of this?

Or does it just make you feel good to talk tough behind the safety of your monitor, in full confidence that you'll never have to back up your macho posturing with action?

I'm waiting...

Dear Syn:

Please don't explain to me how fortunate the Iraqis are to be liberated. Please go fly to Baghdad and go explain it to THEM.

Because they don't seem real grateful.

Yeah, fuck me Cthulu.

I'm too pissed off about these 'tards to snark at them. My bad.

if the shoe fits, BB...

That's IT? That's all you've got? "If the shoe fits?" Jeezus, I didn't know that I was dealing with such a master of wit as yourself.

I must confess, I'm disappointed in you. Not surprised, just disappointed.

I got a lot more but you're not answering, BB.

Must I restate my queries to you, a THIRD time?

Big Brother - why don't you address Renato's areguments rather than selected pieces of his rhetoric?

See, BB, you can't answer my questions. All you can do is wave your hands around and change the subject.

That's why, when it comes to these sticky foreign affairs, we hire DIPLOMATS to deal with these issues. Because they are complicated and there is almost never a simple answer to them.

You and the rest of the 'kill 'em all' crowd are perfect examples of why we don't hire ignorant reactionary yahoos who work at Wal-Mart to conduct our foreign affairs.

The War on Iraq is a perfect example of why war should be the last resort, not the first resort. It has clearly caused more problems than we had in the first place. We have traded one set of old problems, for a set of new problems. Many of them worse than the old ones.

All you need to know to prove that, is drive by a gasoline station. A big part of the reason why it's so expensive these days, is the INSTABILITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

Gee, I wonder how that happened. Must be Clinton's fault, eh?

I ask you again: Please explain to me, in rational terms, how nuking the Middle East would make us better than the terrorists.

Why bother? Like ANYTHING I or anyone else here says is going to make a bit of difference to you. You came in here spouting the usual crap: chickenhawks. Morons. Mouthbreathers. 'Tards.

Why should you listen to anything we have to say? Why should you care? And why should I try to rationally explain anything to you? Tell me, Renato. Spell it out for me.

I'm too pissed off about these 'tards to snark at them.

You're pissed? GOOD. Dance, puppet, dance. I'd be impressed if you'd show HALF the venom that you direct at us at the fuckers who cut off Paul Johnson's head. Just HALF.

I love playing with people like you. I knew that all I had to do is put a line about nuking the middle east in my post and you'd pop a blood vessel. Thanks for fulfilling my expectations perfectly.

I don't see any moral difference between dropping bombs from thirty thousand feet and beheading a bound prisoner. The latter may be messier and the former may require more technical skill, but, really, you're still playing at God the Murder King. And, frankly, while we're on the God topic, I don't care what religion a person practices as long as they don't show up on my doorstep to tell me how to live my life. Case in point: Iraq is Mohammed's doorstep. If you want Jesus's doorstep, go to the Deep South- or Utah. If you think Jesus wants us in Jerusalem, well, arm yourself and go. But don't take my fucking flag with you.

The problem with Iraq is the people so desperate to invade it were the same people who made Saddam what he was. And I think the common Iraqis know that.
One last thing...If you arm and support a brutal dictator in my neighborhood, drop bombs on my children for a decade, then invade under false pretenses, seize all natural resources, instill military law and then have the audacity to preach to me about freedom? I'm bound to do some head-cutting too.

Lousy dodge Big Brother. Far too transparent. Address his arguments.

patriotboy,

Because I don't care enough about him, you, Mike, or any of you to be bothered. As far as I'm concerned, you, renato, and the rest of you trolls can suck exhaust fumes.

Have a nice day, chuckles.

Lousy dodge Big Brother. Far too transparent. Address his arguments.

No.

Gee Renato,

I must be delusional.

I am sure Iraqis loved living under Saddam. That's why, after the fall of Baghdad, everywhere Iraqis went they stomped on his face with their feet.

That's why we saw 25 million Iraqis go out on the streets the day Baghdad fell to begin a massive uprising against the coalition forces.

The Iraqis loved Saddam so much they had to import radical Islamic terrorist organizations who wish to intentionally kill the Iraqi people.

That's why Iraqis absolutely refuse to acknowledge the new Iraqi government.

All signs of great respect towards their beloved fallen leader.

Sure.

The only thing stopping the Arab nations from wiping Isreal off the face of the planet was Saddam.

Sure.

Oh yeah, war should only be used as a last resort up until it is too late, then it is okay?

Sure.

By the way, Vietnam and the sixtes were finished over thirty years ago. Time to get off the magic bus you are riding because you've run out of gas.

Hey trick ...

And, frankly, while we're on the God topic, I don't care what religion a person practices as long as they don't show up on my doorstep to tell me how to live my life

Guess what??? That is EXACTLY what these radical Islamic monsters want to do. And you know what else? If you refuse to go along with them, convert to Islam, become as fanatical as them and embrace Sharia law ... They. Want. You. Dead.

That is the WHOLE point behind this ... wake the hell up while you still can!

Trick

I do not think that waiting for over twelve years, dealing with endless UN resolutions and no-fly zones represents anything close to a desparate wish to invade.

Why the religious implications when Saddam was a noted secularists?

I deeply appreciate the solid logic behind this rational conversation. On one hand, people are saying "If we had not liberated Iraq, hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis a year would be dead, and millions would still be tortured, raped, and starved."

But in the same breath we are saying "nuke 'em all, dirty A-Rabs"

Wait a minute, I'm confused...What are we supposed to think again???

Michelle writes:"I blame people who have taken a religion and distorted, warped and molded it to fit their own homicidal, ugly needs."

How do we know that? What if the religion itself, what if Islam itself, is -- really is -- at bottom a homocidal and ugly and evil religion?

I know it is popular to make the distinction that Michelle makes. It seems to be the standard disclaimer.

And it may well be true.

But what if it is not?

lissakay,

I am awake. The problem is that I was in awake in the Eighties too. That was when our press used to praise the "brave holy warriors, the mujadeen of Afghanistan". I remember reading how ferocious those guys were, how they'd march all day and fight all night on a handful of rice and some dried figs. The reports used to praise the selfless Saudis that had arrived to fight the heathen Ruskis too. They were Muslim fanatics but they were alright with us- in fact, I used to see U.S. congressman posing in photos with them all the time.

They used to be our brothers-in-arms, regardless of religion.

That said, do I want to go anywhere in the Mideast? A resounding no. Do I want any of my buddies over there? Again, no. Am I starting to channel Donny Rumsfeld? Uh, yes...

Ultimately, I find Ashcroft's religion more of a threat to me than Zarqawi.

If we're not in the Mideast, we're not near Mecca.

All you need to know to prove that, is drive by a gasoline station. A big part of the reason why it's so expensive these days, is the INSTABILITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

It's not expensive, certainly not compared to Europe. Instability in the ME is not a big part if we don't want it to be.

We are not entitled to cheap gas.

We can't drill. We can't build refineries, we require over 90 different blends of summer gas. We can't be relatively self-sufficient. We take ourselves out and China uses what we don't.

Doesn't matter. Problem doesn't go away.

Trick - Saddam was a thug at 19. Did we make him that way?

--Please don't explain to me how fortunate the Iraqis are to be liberated. Please go fly to Baghdad and go explain it to THEM.

Because they don't seem real grateful.--

Neither are the frogs, germans, or Sorks, so what's your point?

I also blame Bush. It's his none action and only worrying about his re-election that WON'T happen that he's concerned about. People on his own staff have said this. He's a warmonger. His just trying to finish what Daddy started but, neglected to finish so more people died. I have never seen or heard of so much bloodshed as I have in the past four years. Bush has got to go to get any peace in this world. You righty bushies will all disagree because you're all sniffing bush's ass. He's a disgrace to America!

God Bless Nick Berg and Paul Johnson. They died for Bush and his shitty politics!

Can any of you mouth-breathers explain to me, in rational terms, how mass murder and genocide would make us different from terrorists?

Ask the Japanese.

even remain calm enough to formulate an intelligent response. Sorry.
Posted by: Hubris

I doubt you have one---an intelligent respones that is. Bushie!

We exist. We allow our women education. We allow them to drive, to vote.

The West has been "inciting" them for hundreds of years, even when we didn't allow that.

The Crusades were defensive. Egypt and that area at one time were Christian.

200 years to throw them out of Spain.

Then they came back to the gates of Vienna - 1653 or 1683 we finally repelled them.

And they're back again.

So, unless you want the West and its beliefs and ideals to go bye-bye, we fight. Again.

trick ... can we stay on topic?

This is not about supporting Afghanis AGAINST the Soviets, our blood enemy in the 80s and before ... and it is not about whether you would take holiday in the ME.

It is about death. Your death.

That is exactly what these barbarians want. They want you dead. They preach it from mosques in the ME ... and here in the US. They want you to be dead.

You don't have to go to the ME for them to make that desire come true. They will come to you.

And they don't give a rat's shit that you think they are a bunch of OK fellas that are just miffed at the big old US of A, and that you hate America as much as they do.

They still want you dead.

Think about that while you're hugging your little tree.

Dead. You. They will not stop until they achieve that goal.

syn,

You're right: for twelve long years we had no desperate need to invade. So why the rush?
I read a lot of foreign papers in the lead-up to the war. I presume if you're online you might have done the same. Most of them concluded what the American public is only hearing now- that there was no proof of WMD. As the facts underpinning the Whitehouse's rationale fell apart, our President began recounting the horror of Saddam's reign and our goal became that of rescuing the Iraqi people. Now I'm hearing the same people who voiced hearty backing of that plan endorsing the nuking of the Mideast because Muslims are now somehow a fundamentally flawed segment of society?
I don't get it? How did we get to there?

"The Crusades were defensive"

So, is this a crusade? Thank you for saying exactly what the terrorist propagandists want.

Please explain to me why we were told over and over we were going to Iraq to liberate the Iraqis, and now you want to kill 'em all.

Told what? We were told it was for WMD..First. Bush has chenged his mind so many times why, we're in Iraq, I've lost count of all the reasons. If Bush wouldn't lie so much, maybe we'd all know the REAL reason. Daddy's war!

I guess we don't want OBL anymore eh? He only went after him for the short time that he did so's, he could get that out of the way since OBL screwed up Bushies real plan since he lost the presidency, To finish what daddy started. Only, we're not going to finish it, we're going to pay for it..with our lives while, bushie boy sits in his fucking golf cart 8 months of the year.

I'm too pissed off about these 'tards to snark at them. My bad.
Posted by: renato at June 18, 2004 07:30 PM

How Buffy and the Scooby gang of you...

Lissakay,

I'll forgive you your hysteria if you forgive me the tree-hugging thing.

I'm sure there are thousands of guys willing to kill me in Iraq right now. And I'm thankful I'm not over there. And I worry for the people I know who are there. But the willingness of Iraqis to kill me didn't come out of nowhere. This isn't StarWars. A Shiat isn't a bad man simply because he wears a black helmet and breathes heavily. And George Bush didn't show up for Starfighter training anyway. The point is, war is both a cause and an effect. And religion is too. I've read enough of the Bible and the Koran to think Mohammed and Jesus would have gotten along quite well. And I think they would both be appalled at what's being done, on both sides.
At any rate, the sin-if you want to call it that- lies on both sides.

I don't get it? How did we get to there?

BUSH, that's how. The lying bastard!

Wow trick ... you really do have your head in the sand! Amazing ... truly amazing.

Have you not read or listened to what your Islamist buddies are saying? Do you not read history to see how long they have been saying these things? Do you really not know or comprehend what they mean?

And don't you get it that you and your Islamist-apologist, tree hugging, raving moonbat friends are playing right into their agenda?

They don't give a shit about diplomacy, appeasement or apologies ... apologize all you want, appease them, invite them for a big group hug. Just don't be surprised to find your head on your back ...

Sandy P.

No doubt Sadam was a thug at nineteen.

Christ, man, I'm not going to argue that we hastened that onetime sweet youth down the corridor of darkness...but we did help him to power. As I understand it, when the democratically elected president of Iraq(whose name I can't recall) was negotiating oil contracts with other countries, we backed his toppling. It wasn't about morality- it was maintaining our access to cheap oil. And in that pursuit we funded and armed Saddam all the way up to the first Desert Storm.

Personally, I wanted Saddam out after he invaded Kuwait, but the rantings of a few 'tricks' around the world shouting out paranoid predictions of the devastations of war stopped this from happening. So, the UN catered to the Kool-aid crowd, even though Saddam had also just gassed hundreds of thousands of Kurds, the Kool-aid crowd won. Yelled about the oil then too.

A decade of knowing that the Kool-aid crowd allowed for Saddam to remain in power only to terrorize 25 million Iraqis through murder, rape, torture, starvation is the reason why I am determined to win this war.

If the Kool-aid crowd wants to see the results of their decision to allow Saddam to reign by terror they might wish view the video at American Enterprise Institute showing what happens when you simply 'containt a mere irritant'

Trick-
With all your heart and soul you can fabricate the most fantasical arguments in the world as to why the liberation of Iraq was a bad idea but, this time around, I am not going to cower to your selfish determinations.

What I learned from the lessons of Vietnam and Gulf War I is do not listen to the Kool-aid crowd.

So, trick, if you make a mistake, you have no moral obligation to correct it? In fact, it seems to me that you are saying that if you make a mistake you have an obligation to continue to make that mistake until the end of time.

Interesting viewpoint you have.

I am sure Iraqis loved living under Saddam. That's why, after the fall of Baghdad, everywhere Iraqis went they stomped on his face with their feet.

syn, you fool. they used us, now they want us O.U.T!

you just can't see the whole picture through those bushie colored glasses.

BB -

you got nothin'.

Gee Renato,

I must be delusional.

yes, Syn, you are. Only losers argue with straw men.

I'm glad we can agree about something.

Trick - Saddam was a thug at 19. Did we make him that way?

Maybe not at 19, but he was only a little older when he became our thug.

U.S. forces in Baghdad might now be searching high and low for Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, but in the past Saddam was seen by U.S. intelligence services as a bulwark of anti-communism and they used him as their instrument for more than 40 years, according to former U.S. intelligence diplomats and intelligence officials.

United Press International has interviewed almost a dozen former U.S. diplomats, British scholars and former U.S. intelligence officials to piece together the following account. The CIA declined to comment on the report.

While many have thought that Saddam first became involved with U.S. intelligence agencies at the start of the September 1980 Iran-Iraq war, his first contacts with U.S. officials date back to 1959, when he was part of a CIA-authorized six-man squad tasked with assassinating then Iraqi Prime Minister Gen. Abd al-Karim Qasim.

In July 1958, Qasim had overthrown the Iraqi monarchy in what one former U.S. diplomat, who asked not to be identified, described as "a horrible orgy of bloodshed."

According to current and former U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, Iraq was then regarded as a key buffer and strategic asset in the Cold War with the Soviet Union. For example, in the mid-1950s, Iraq was quick to join the anti-Soviet Baghdad Pact which was to defend the region and whose members included Turkey, Britain, Iran and Pakistan.

Little attention was paid to Qasim's bloody and conspiratorial regime until his sudden decision to withdraw from the pact in 1959, an act that "freaked everybody out" according to a former senior U.S. State Department official.

Washington watched in marked dismay as Qasim began to buy arms from the Soviet Union and put his own domestic communists into ministry positions of "real power," according to this official. The domestic instability of the country prompted CIA Director Allan Dulles to say publicly that Iraq was "the most dangerous spot in the world."

In the mid-1980s, Miles Copeland, a veteran CIA operative, told UPI the CIA had enjoyed "close ties" with Qasim's ruling Baath Party, just as it had close connections with the intelligence service of Egyptian leader Gamel Abd Nassar. In a recent public statement, Roger Morris, a former National Security Council staffer in the 1970s, confirmed this claim, saying that the CIA had chosen the authoritarian and anti-communist Baath Party "as its instrument."

According to another former senior State Department official, Saddam, while only in his early 20s, became a part of a U.S. plot to get rid of Qasim. According to this source, Saddam was installed in an apartment in Baghdad on al-Rashid Street directly opposite Qasim's office in Iraq's Ministry of Defense, to observe Qasim's movements.

More here.

I know what some of you are going to say next. I'll wait to hear it before I reply. Hehehehehe.

Osama Bin Forgotten.

syn and Kathy K,

I agree that it's sad the way I trip myself up once I start arguing about morality, and for that, I apologize.

You know, if we could just ease off on assuming anything about my shameful liberal character, this would be informative for me. (Really)

Actually, Syn, I thought we should go all the way to Baghdad the first time. I'm a Clausewitz man myself: you don't start a fight unless you're willing to go to the bloody end. I don't think Clausewitz would be too happy with our current plan. Occupations never work out well- unless you're willing to kill the existing population. Which I'm clearly not.

Kathy K, you pose an interesting question. How far back do you go to right a wrong? We imposed the Shah to guarantee cheap gas from Iran. We backed Saddam to do the same in Iraq. Then we armed him to keep the post-Shah rebellion from sweeping all the way to the Saudis and taking their little totalitarian state down. We at first demurred when Saddam threatened Kuwait, saying we had no opinion on arab-on-arab conflicts, then panicked when Saddam gulped the whole country and frightened the President's business partners. What would you have done? What would you have us do now? How would you set abou assuring people we've betrayed multiple times that, this time, we mean it.

Lastly, childishly, I have to establish one thing. No one has ever mistaken me for a pacifist and I've got the scars, the x-rays and the ringing headaches to prove it. So, please, don't assume I'm playin with my beads and dreads as I write this. Thanks. I'll try to keep from huring any similar partisan cliches.

hurling.
hur-ling.

And Renato, thanks for the core dump.

Like I said this on Dean's site, I get the feeling that most of the people in this country are getting tired of the "torture" rants of Abu Grahib. And I believe that the more these terrorists utilize this argument of AG as an excuse to cut someone's head off, or blow something up, the angrier and angrier this country will get - and the more the misdeeds of those few at AG will pale. Keep it up you guys.

Could not agree with you more Michele when you said that being led around by a leash should be the least of their GD worries.

And let us not forget exactly who those poor "tortured" people are ...

So they had to wear panties on their heads. At least they have heads to wear them on ...

I hate to bait the trolls, but I believe June 30, we will be "out" of Iraqi government - so all that crap about "they hate us, now they want us out" is going to be a moot point. And fwiw, the people who "hate us" so much are so bad at projection that they're blowing up hundreds of THEIR OWN PEOPLE. Oooh. That'll get us. 100 more Iraqis dead in front of an army recruiting station.

That's going to show those Americans we mean business.

Please. The peopel who are doing this have no need for the Iraqi people, any more than Saddam did. They aren't "rebels." They aren't "insurgents," and they aren't "freedom fighters." They are murderous thugs who deserve to be exterminated.

I don't agree with the sentiment of bombing the whole place. I know there are a lot of innocent people in the ME who just want to get by like you and I. But the ones who want us out are not those people.

you got nothin'.

Heh heh heh. It must be so frustrating for you that I'm not playing. Keep trying to provoke me; I'm enjoying it.

It seems to me that our relationship with the entire Mideast would be much simpler if we were more honorable in our dealings. That is, if we made, kept and honored our alliances. The problem is that our high ideals are constantly taking backseat to our profit margins- that's where the problem lies.

Perhaps the idea is naive to you, profanely so. But how much would we have spent if we had simply paid higher prices for gas? Would allowing the Mideast to evolve beyond Third World despotism have saved us from the seemingly inescapable culture death match offered now?

I'm not yearning for a utopian vision: I am wondering if longterm fair trade would save us billions by negating the corporate welfare necessary to keep Exxon shareholders happy.

After reading every one of these posts. I side with Trick, think lissakay is a riot and bigbrother is a troll. I hope you don't mind me just reading. I don't have much to comment about since, you're all doing so well without me interfering.

damnitjanet

bigbrother is a troll

More of an anti-troll, at least today. I'm just not in the mood right now, with this latest news, of playing yet another series of games with someone like renato who came into this discussion from the start saying things like "You people are fucking morons." (That's a direct quote.)

I don't debate people like that. He and his fellows (and I'm not including trick in this; he seems actually interested in discussion, even if I don't agree with him) don't want to talk; they want to berate. They want to make themselves feel superior by arguing with the dumbass conservatives, but they aren't willing to take the most basic step: respect for your opponent.

I will freely admit to taunting him, Mike, and their like. I guess, in a way, that does make me a troll. I'm just trolling the trolls. It's pretty easy to do.

All this bickering.
come see what the old up hillbilly has for you and them.
Renato, you are an idiot.
Kill them all I say.
My blind ass is willing to toe the mark.
Who can stand against those that can and will defend themselves.
And yes I have kin in the line of fire.
It is as it has always been for my family. We will defend all of you, even you, Renato.

We are not going to win this thing until we all get on the same page. That is not going to happen until we win the war of ideas against these jackasses who would prefer to see the enemies of civilization destroy us than see a Republican get some credit. We can start with a resounding Bush victory over the most vacous candidate I have ever seen in my life. And I am a registered Democrat who has yet to pull the lever for a Republican in a national election.

My Apologies BB

It's OK, damnitjanet. I've been in a nasty mood today (no surprise), and watching renato twist in the wind has been enjoyable.

What the hell is wrong with you people?!

This post was created out of the rage and disgust for what has happened today. MANY of us feel these same emotions when we think of what this man, and his family, have suffered. Today.

But the jerks who 'troll around', looking for an opportunity to attack the thoughts and opinions of others...! and you have the nerve to accuse others of hatred?!

This whole post-modern, I'm right/you're right, can't we all just get along attitude is foolhardy...actually, just plain foolish. And, it is dangerous.

How has the "pity the poor bullish soul" thing worked for children on the playground? Has the "Now Johnny, you know you should never hit anyone" speach EVER spared a child from bullying?

The truth is, that it's the kid, or adult, or family, or community, OR country that stands up for itself, particularly when faced with grueling circumstances, that achieves self-esteem and respect.

The blessed thing about this is, that once one has achieved the satisfaction that comes from standing up for oneself, the doubters cannot take it away. All they can hope to do is to swoop in, like some insidious, opportunistic disease, and try to plant themselves where they might find the food they need to grow.

As tempting as it is, let's try not to give it to them.

I wish, for just one day, that everyone who follows the blogosphere would simply refuse to fuel their fire, and allow them to suffocate under the heat their own burning rage.

An intelligent person will always welcome a reasoned, albeit passionate debate, and will gladly defend their viewpoint, while considering, thoughtfully, the views of another. As for the others, they're simply wasting our time.

It sure has been a day for a rotten mood. I don't think anyone can be blamed for popping an attitude.
BB

I think, we all saw this coming though. How could we not after, Nick Berg, I just knew when I heard about Paul Johnson Tuesday, it was going to turn out the same. After all, look at what and who we're dealing with here. They didn't care about the 600 prisoners, they really just wanted to kill Paul Johnson. It must be a thrill for them, to see people waiting to find out what his fate will be. That kind of power, they thrive on. It's just sick. I'm glad we killed three of them though, that just leaves hundreds, if not thousands more now. I would imagine since the leader is dead, he's got something of a VP status waiting in the wings to take over the ship.

I know the formatting sucks, but so what.
renato;
You state that INSTABILITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST is the reason for high gas prices. Do you actually think about things prior to speaking? I mean, seriously. OPEC does not fluctuate gas prices commensurate with stability in the Middle East. They, with respect to crude oil pricing, are dictators. They don't give a damn about "INSTABILITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST." They want our dollars, the euro, the peso, the yen and whatever other currency they can lay their greedy, grubby little hands on. It could be like Vermont in the summertime throughout the ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST, and we could STILL be paying $3.24 USD per gallon. Why? Because the guys that have the oil bend us over to get it. Why are they able to do that? Because we, in a now CLEARLY misguided effort to promote trade and bolster relations with the Sauds, promised NOT to turn there little desert oasis into a "slowly cooling plate of radioactive glass in less time that it takes to get through a McDonalds drive thru" (thanks datarat). The sheer GALL of people like Osama, who certainly had it BETTER as a result of our generosity, to stand on his soapbox and claim that we are the devil, we are the problem; it's disgusting! "Berg and Johnson and over 800 American soldiers and thousands of iraqis would be alive today if it weren't for the invasion and occupation of Iraq, a DIVERSION from the WOT" So, do you really want us to believe that Americans would have been/will be safer if we had not gone in/pulled out of Iraq? "I ask you again: Please explain to me, in rational terms, how nuking the Middle East would make us better than the terrorists" I don't actually belive anyone said it WOULD make us better than the terrorists. But you know what? It would make US alive and THEM dead. At least for the short-term. And that would go a LONG way towards making AMERICANS feel safe®. Lastly, to address your issue of Saddam being "our thug"; That we helped him fight back against Iran does not make his atrocities against his own people acceptable. That we helped bin Laden fight back against the Soviets does not make his atrocities against his own people or ours acceptable. We, like a large majority of the rest of the world, use the help we can get when we feel we need it. And, like most of the rest of the world, we don't feel that if our helpers suddenly turn on us that we should forgive them. The bible says "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us". Well, we allowed the Taliban to trespass against us, and for a long time we forgave them. Then, bin Laden decided that we were being complacent; so he killed several thousand people who probably didn't have any direct involvement with middle-eastern affairs to prove how awful America is. Saddam trespassed against us. And, again, we forgave him for a long time. Then he went and invaded Kuwait. So we kicked the crap out of the Republic Guard (is it funny that they were they Republican Guard and got their butts whupped?), and sent Saddam packing. At what point do we determine that enough really is enough? Is it ONLY after direct attacks against us on our soil? Are we not allowed "pre-emptive" strikes? Believe me, I know Bush lied about a lot of things. But, I also know that the world IS a better place without Saddam. As it would be without bin Laden, or ANY terrorist. Especially those who would preach religion as their justification in destroying anyone or anything.

Enjoy life while you've got it, because tomorrow you might just lose your head...

Vern

In one breath, your angry and despondent over a complete stranger who was put in harm's way by the policies of our government (over many years) and ideologies of the current administration and its progenitors. In the next you're wishing similarly violent fates for those who happen to voice opinions different from yours.

I can only hope that you can eventually develop perspective. Your enemy is not dissent or those who speak it; your enemy is your refusal to understand why any of this has happened.

germamy

I'm sure the militants are all quivering in fear right now. I know I certainly would be if I were them. I'd be running around frantically screaming "Oh no! A guy on the internet is coming for me! Allah has forsaken me!"

I would like to second Gerard Van der Leun's comment waaaay up there. Only he, as far as I can tell, points out Michelle's dhimmi-like standard disclaimer about these Islamic murderers distorting a religion.

No. This is the religion. Straight up; wwhhhhff; straight down. Heads roll.

JdB

My enemy is my "refusal to understand why any of this happened"?

I understand that Middle Eastern governments oppressed their people for so long while directing blame on Western civilization that the people decided to attack us instead of overthrowing their own oppressive governments.

My friend from Egypt immigrated to America eight years ago because he knew there was nothing for him in Egypt. In the mid 1950's the Egyptian government stole everything from his family. He grew up in poverty forced upon him by his own government. He will never return to Egypt.

Anyone believing that America is the cause of all problems in the Middle East knows nothing of the disfranchisement Middle Eastern governments have caused upon their own people. Disfranchisment all in the name of Allah.

They might like the idea of Americans hating America, but the real benefit of this kind of terrorism is that it encourages exactly the kind of overreaction you feel welling up inside you. As you note, there is no appropriate violent response to this atrocity, unless the actual perpetrators can be identified and captured. Lashing out at people of the same ethnicity will only make the problem worse.

The only thing we have true control over is our own behavior, so it is worth examining that behavior critically and minimizing any aspects of it that have pointlessly make the situation worse. Such criticism is not self-hatred, it is a sign of spiritual strength and courage.

syn, Egypt will be instituting property rights by the end of the year.

So they're actually moving into the double-digit century.

flambe, there's more than enough to go around.

Crusades for the religious,

defeating fascism for the non.

Target the message to the audience.

Same way over there. OBL is about power money and control and uses religion to stir up the unwashed. So did Saddam, IIRC. After all, the Koran in his own blood?

Besides, isn't that what they've called us for centuries?

-- morality- it was maintaining our access to cheap oil. And in that pursuit we funded and armed Saddam all the way up to the first Desert Storm.--

Do tell.

Not quite and wasn't there an Iran/Iraq skirmish during the 80s?

And something about hostages during 1979-80 and our embassy?

Actually, we stopped in 1988.

Sipri has an arms trade chart. Sometimes it's context. Better to have those 2 fighting each other.

--

Oh, and morality? I really don't pay any attention to any arguments which bring that up. It's all about legality now, morality is so 1980s. We're going secular now, you know. There's only shades of gray.

Forget the morality comment, I cut off the wrong part, sorry.

However--What would you have us do now? How would you set abou assuring people we've betrayed multiple times that, this time, we mean it.
--

What we're doing now, paying in blood.

And Saddam only came to power in 1983? Cos that's when we start supplying him w/arms, according to SIPRI. The Soviets, however....

You want to know what to do about this latest atrocity? Watch and learn:

http://junkyardblog.net/video/psychodems.mov

Wow! What a site! A bunch of conservatives who actually have the balls to allow opposing viewpoints. Unlike LGF, who immediately delete any liberal posts. Unlike Rush "Boil Ass" Limbaugh, who doesn't allow any contrary opinions on his show.

Anyway, what people seem to be forgetting in this discussion is that we wouldn't be in this mess if you people hadn't voted for a wussy-ass rich-boy high school cheerleader who's afraid of horses. I mean, how in the hell can you claim to care about Amrerica if you voted for that moron? He's an embarassment!

Anyway, the Abu Graib shit is about to hit the fan. Check out this article by Christopher Hitchens, one of your fellow conservatives:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102373/

Chimpy's going down, baby. Time to get this country back on the left track again!

First I wanted to kill these terrorist SOB's, then I made the blog rounds. I found a large portion of people on my favorite blogs wanting to nuke something and/or kill them all, and I thought to myself "Myself, that would pretty much solve the problem. No more Muslims = no more Islamic terrorism." QED.

Then I read the retorts to these calls to genocide. Their big meme seams to come down to the question "How would that make us any different from them?" I see some of you nodding your heads because this makes sense, we are the good guys, we don't kill indiscriminately.

"How would that make us any different from them?" turn that question over in your head a few times and see if you can get where I'm going first. The answer is easy. It wouldn't make us any different. Why, because they want to kill all of us. THEY WANT GENOCIDE! The stated goal of there religion is to convert, enslave, or kill anyone not of the Muslim faith. I could link to the appropriate verses of the Koran or the speeches of the Mullahs but it would be redundant, it's been done here and elsewhere many times.

The next statement I hear a lot is, "It's only a few terrorists that feel that way, the majority want peace." What a piece of unmitigated bullshit. We have all seen the footage of Arabs dancing in the streets after some attack on the U.S. or the evil Jooooos. We have seen the Imans preaching death and destruction to the Great Satan. We have seen these things not just recently, but for at least the last twenty years I've been paying attention to the world stage. Why do we keep seeing these things? Why do the more popular Imans keep saying these things? Because they strike a cord with the a lot of the Muslims. Not just in the ME, but we are seeing it in Europe and in the US as well.

The moderate Muslim doesn't exist. I like to think of myself as fairly moderate, although more than a few leftists would lable me as a fascist. That's fine, it proves my point even more. I may be a fascist but the groups I support and give money to are groups like Spirit of America or Operation Shoe Fly. Compare that to the groups the so called moderate Muslims contribute to, namely Hizbollah and Hamas, that have admitted to terrorist activities. Until the funding for groups such as these dries up, until the radical Imans are shouted down instead of defended, until we see cries of outrage instead of dancing, until this comes to pass. There is no moderate Muslim.

Brass

P.S. Nuke them All.

I'd like to take this opportunity to point out a simple truth: George W. Bush is an ignorant asshole, and does not deserve to be President of the United States. If you vote for him, then you too are an ignorant asshole.

Some asshole who claimed his name was "Doug" wrote:

We are not going to win this thing until we all get on the same page. That is not going to happen until we win the war of ideas against these jackasses who would prefer to see the enemies of civilization destroy us than see a Republican get some credit. We can start with a resounding Bush victory over the most vacous candidate I have ever seen in my life. And I am a registered Democrat who has yet to pull the lever for a Republican in a national election.

And I am Marie of Roumania.

Nice to meet you, Marie.

Yes, Riesz. Thank goodness for a blog that recognizes that in these troubled, complex times, a bit of comic relief from lefty-intellectuals, such as yourself, can do a world of good for lifting our spirits.

Thanks, Michele! That's good one!

I'm not yearning for a utopian vision: I am wondering if longterm fair trade would save us billions by negating the corporate welfare necessary to keep Exxon shareholders happy.

And what makes you think the money will get to the people?

Haven't we and most of the rest of the world paid for the oil we've used? Don't we pay for the oil now? Have things changed? We were paying a far higher price in the 70s.

Do you remember the 70s and the shopping sprees in England?

on Nuking them all

1) If we did massively kill most of the middle east, we WOULDN'T be the same as the terrorists because its in SELF DEFENSE - we didn't start this war - and that's an objective fact - we haven't ever attacked the terrorists who are attacking us - and by attack I mean physcial violence, which is an OBJECTIVE STANDARD - WE HAVE NEVER DIRECTLY PHYSICALLY ATTACKED THE TERRORISTS AGAINST US - sure we support Israel, with MONEY, countries all around the world have different alliances and such - we weren't the ones who moved the palastinians (which was wrong for Britain to do) - we're just against them blowing up innocent civilians (and don't give me any of that "Israel is terrorist" shit - Israel attacks the palestinians, but they attack THE TERRORIST LEADERS THEY DONT DELIBRATELY ATTACK INNOCENT CIVILIANS)

Basically the only argument they have is Israel - which still doesn't justify the terrorism against us by other arabs who have nothing to do with said conflict

Everything after that we did was in response to terrorism

2) Frankly, I don't really care about "being better than" the terrorists - I really only care about surviving and my family and countrymen surviving - you say I'm no better than the terrorists? fine, as long as me and my family and my country are still alive

3)Some people say we have to go to war, but make sure to kill as few civilians as possible - but to try to avoid enemy civilian casualties takes HAVING OUR OWN SOLDIERS KILLED - why the hell do we have to waste our lives (our soldiers' lives) to prevent the deaths of "innocents" when we're DEFENDING OUR LIVES - if one party/person aggresses another party/person, the person defending isn't required to watch out for third party damage, to say that he does would completely negate the right to self-defense

just imagine, some guy starts attacking you in an ally to try to get your money (or rape you or for whatever reason) - OK, right now YOUR LIFE IS IN SERIOUS RISK - you then shove the attacker, and he bumps into a person on the street, and that innocent bystander consequently falls onto the street and then gets run over and dies - ok, so your act of defending yourself just killed that innocent bystander, who had nothing to do with you (the defender) or the attacker - were you in the wrong for defending yourself? No of course not - when you were defending yourself, were you morally required to incur a number of POSSIBLY LETHAL STABS to take the time and effort to look around and plan out your defense actions to make sure you don't harm innocent bystanders? of course not

when you're defending yourself - you're LIFE - you're not morally required to bear the risks and injuries that would be necessary to make sure you don't harm any innocent bystanders - saying that you do negates the right to self-defense

and thusly the same thing applies to groups of people (i.e. countries) defending themselves (i.e. in war)

4)I wouldn't exactly call the civilians in the arab world "innocent" - the truth is the for the most part the majority of the people there agree with the terrorists or at least with having Shariah law theocracies - they are NOT pining for freedom and democracy - would you be if you were raised and taught your whole life to believe in Islam and forcibly imposed Shariah law

5) again, better or not better than the terrorists, my main concern is the lives of me and my friends and family and my country

I agree w/Wind Rider over at Silent Running:

Time for some 'Cultural Sensitivity' Lessons

They don't like having underwear put on their heads.

We don't like having our countrymen's heads chopped off.

Get busy explaining to them that they need to be more 'sensitive', so they can 'understand where we're coming from' when we eventually kick their asses. Sounds like a job for Fisk. Maybe Michael Moore will help him out.

Some asshole who claimed his name was "Doug" wrote:

He also wrote it on an Iraqi blog. Word for word.

Riesz:

Wow! What a site! A bunch of conservatives who actually have the balls to allow opposing viewpoints. Unlike LGF, who immediately delete any liberal posts. Unlike Rush "Boil Ass" Limbaugh, who doesn't allow any contrary opinions on his show.

Umm, you don't actually read LGF or listen to Limbaugh, do you?

Big Brother: Umm, you don't actually read LGF or listen to Limbaugh, do you?

Yes, I sometimes read LGF, just to see what they're saying there. I've never tried to post anything-- I figure the post would be deleted and I'd be banned. Maybe if I try to be mellow I might get away with it.

I only listen to Limbaugh when I'm in a vehicle with a conservative coworker during the day. This happened a couple of times in the last year. Both times Rush was talking about Monica Lewinsky. I laughed and asked my coworkers why conservatives are so uptight about sex, which they took exception to.

watching renato twist in the wind has been enjoyable.

Posted by: Big Brother

Exactly how am I twisting in the wind?

I asked you some very good questions and you can't answer a single one.

Because you say it, it makes it so?

The next time you get called a moron, don't wonder why. Just look at what you write.

You got nothin'.

If you big talkers wanna go kill some Arabs, then fucking sign up for the military.

Or shut the fuck up.

I'm sure we could even take up a collection for you bullshit artists, to fly you over to Baghdad so you can prove what big men you are.

It's easy to talk about killing them all, when someone else is going to be doing the killing for you.

Fucking nazis.

The vile subhuman muslim scum have declared war upon western civilization in the name of their screwed-up interpretation of the Religion of Peace have brutally murdered American Paul Johnson. Why did these muslim animals (with apologies to actual animals) do this? Why, because he was American and they could. It is time to take the gloves off. Enough. Enough of the Geneva Conventions, which were for nations and entered into with the idea that both sides of a conflict would honor them. Enough of the UN, those sorry apologists for and financiers of monsters. Enough of the EU and old Europe and their pandering cheese-eating ways. Enough of the ISM and ANSWER and CAIR and Amnesty International and Michael Moore and his treasonous so-called documentaries. Enough of every single moron who doesn't understand that there is a war to the end and our only voice in the matter is whether we fight it and whose end it will be. Enough. The ideology of Islamism, which will shed blood of good godly men like Paul Johnson and Danny Pearl and Nick Berg and countless others to its dying breath must be eradicated, branch and root. There must be nothing left of it. Nothing. Not one Islamist mosque. Not one madrassa. Not one website. Not one murdering jihadi. Nothing. That's when we'll be safe from this Islamicist psychosis. I wish I could be in Iraq right now. No Islamist would be safe.

Renato:

I love to see you pissed off. It fills my heart with joy to see you sputter. Your insults are a fine wine to me.

So, same time tomorrow?

Yes, I sometimes read LGF, just to see what they're saying there. I've never tried to post anything-- I figure the post would be deleted and I'd be banned. Maybe if I try to be mellow I might get away with it.

So you "figure" your post is going to be deleted and you'd be banned, without evidence. It's the same with Limbaugh; you haven't heard him do what you accuse him of, but that doesn't matter.

Just so you know, Limbaugh (and almost any talk-show host for that matter) will put opposing points of view to the front of the caller line. It generates controversy and discussion, both of which are good for ratings. I've heard him do this many, many times. Liberals call in, and they get put on the air FIRST.

Seems to me Clinton was way uptight about sex. The words "blow job" never past his lips.

He is so uptight about his sexuality he could only utter the words 'that woman" instead of her name.

I would like to tell clinton 'that woman' her name is Monica and she sucked your cock. Monica did not swallow, he must have tasted awful.

Ungrateful asshole!

Gee, I thought the Iraq war was supposed to REDUCE terrorism. Instead it has incited MORE of it. Berg and Johnson and over 800 American soldiers and thousands of iraqis would be alive today if it weren't for the invasion and occupation of Iraq, a DIVERSION from the WOT.

No, we'd have had thousands more Iraqis dead from the oil for palaces scam.

Now we have morons who think we should just kill all the Arabs, preferably with those nukes we have just sitting around not doing anything useful. Hell we taxpayers paid for them, why not use them?

Wow, you act as though this is a new phenomenon.

There've been people calling for this since October 1983 at the least.

Can any of you mouth-breathers explain to me, in rational terms, how mass murder and genocide would make us different from terrorists?

Because maybe if we did these things, we too would be called "militants" "freedom fighters" and the like.

Maybe if we did these things, we'd be back on the UN Human Rights Comission instead of ignored and ridiculed by the world.

I'm sure if Bush called for an intifada, he'd be as well respected as Arafat is.

Lest anyone misunderstand my previous comment, no, genocide of the Arabs is not an appropriate solution. But unless things change, things improve "out there" the genocide of Arabs or Muslims will be sanctioned by more and more Americans. Or if not sanctioned, "ignored" much as how the world has ignored the genocides that have taken place throughout world history.

Big Brother: So you "figure" your post is going to be deleted and you'd be banned, without evidence. It's the same with Limbaugh; you haven't heard him do what you accuse him of, but that doesn't matter.

I've seen deleted posts on LGF and I've never seen any but the most mellow liberal posts there. Nothing like my post about Chimpy above (which I recommend that everyone read-- it's very interesting and provocative). Anyway, it's no big deal-- I considered it a compliment to this blog that they allow people like me to come over here and toy with you people. :-)

and a leftist America-hater finally pulls "Nazi" out of her bag of blather.

well, no one saw that coming! whew!

Riesz,

About the only ones who are banned at LGF are those who troll, people just looking to insult and fight. Even then, it's only after they repeatedly, obnoxiously do so that they get the axe. There are ultra-left-wing posters like "Gordon" who've posted for months and months and are not banned.

The "chimpy" remark wouldn't get you banned. I must note, however, that it's not really provocative or, well, interesting. My eyes usually glaze over when I read I read lines like that.

Now, if you want to talk instant banning, go to the far-left site Democrat Underground and post ANYTHING with a conservative point of view. Anything at all. Bam, you're gone. They even tell you that in their posting rules.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html

"We ban conservative disruptors who are opposed to the broad goals of this website. If you think overall that George W. Bush is doing a swell job, or if you wish to see Republicans win, or if you are generally supportive of conservative ideals, please do not register to post, as you will likely be banned."

So, let me see if I have this right.

You good patriotic Americans see pictures of an American dying with his head cut off, and immediately start talking about mass murdering Arabs, and this is right and perfectly understandable.

Whereas if Arabs see pictures of Arab children with their heads blown to pieces by Americans, and turn to terrorism and sniping at GIs in response, and this is wrong and shows how evil they are.

Is that what you're saying?

Michele, I think it's time to require registration. I don't mind folks' comments nearly as much as the fact that they're posting them from nonsense e-mail addresses. Maybe this suggestion will get me yelled at, I don't know (don't know what your position on registration is).

Phoenician, the car bombers and wannabe headsmen don't give a f*ck about those dead kids, and you and I both know it. I don't believe for a second that the professional assassins we're seeing in Iraq and elsewhere were veterinarians and bookkeepers a year ago.

Honestly, I haven't had the time to go through a lot of these comments. Also, I don't delete comments unless they are outright threats or if they include racial or ethnic slurs. That goes for both sides of an argument.

I'll be going through here tonight and checking all the comments.

This post's comments seem to have attracted an unusual amount of trolls. I wonder if someone posted a link to it on DU or some other moonbat-infested web cesspool. Or maybe it's just the same obsessed, no-life-having troll using different fakenames and fakemails. The troll comments do have the dreary ring of sameness to them.

Helping the Iraqis is fine and dandy, but next time there is an aggressive attack against us we need to ramp up the bodycount and damned be anyone between us and our enemies.
Wait a second. Isn't Kong showing the exact sort of behavior you're warning us against? This act of terror was not about Iraq. It was about 'the war on terror,' Palestine and Israel, and was perpetrated in Saudi Arabia. Michele's thesis is a good one: it's bigger than Bush, and it's bigger than Iraq. It's part of the very long history of the region. Religiously fueled, or at least postured, wars are nothing new to any region of the world. What an effective way to get people so emotional that the only visible path out of these horrific wars is their continuation on new and still more maligned scales. We've all had days where we wondered wtf we have nuclear weapons for if we're not using them to just f*cking put a cease to it, already, but that makes about as much sense as putting this all down to Biblical prophecy. I'm sure such a culling is being preached even now.
I'd love to hear a better solution. But I think we'll just see more of this constant that is human history. Sigh.

Big Brother, saying "nyah nyah I win!" might have cut it on the third grade playground, but in grown-up world, you have to be able to think of something intelligent and factual to say, to back up your argument.

I've yet to see that.

What I have seen from you, is this:

Shove a power drill up your ass and turn it on for all I care. And nuke the middle east, for all I care as well.

Fucking idiots.

I knew that all I had to do is put a line about nuking the middle east in my post and you'd pop a blood vessel.

Ohhhh! What a brilliant strategy, sir! Sounding like a bloodthirsty moron! Gee! smacks head Now why didn't I think of doing that?

Maybe it's because I have at least two brain cells to rub together?

Because I don't care enough about him, you, Mike, or any of you to be bothered. As far as I'm concerned, you, renato, and the rest of you trolls can suck exhaust fumes.

My sir, you are indeed a master of rhetoric! I do say, you have certainly got me there! What good are facts, reason and intelligence in the face of your "suck exhaust fumes" gambit?

For your next intellectual feat, perhaps you could explain how the tensions between Kurds and Arabs in northern Iraq are in danger of leading to a bloodbath? Make sure to include reference to the number of times the Kurds have been betrayed by the US and other ostensible 'liberators'. To make things easy on you, limit that to the 20th century.

When you're done with that exposition, perhaps you could enlighten us as to what degree of 'sovereignty' Iraq will enjoy post-30 June and how ordinary Iraqis might perceive it, considering that the US military will enjoy extra-territorial status, there will be no Iraqi legislature, and the US will retain the final right to approve or disapprove of rebuiliding contracts.

I await yet another brilliant, incisive display of your wit and intellectual prowess.

Phoenician, the car bombers and wannabe headsmen don't give a f*ck about those dead kids, and you and I both know it. I don't believe for a second that the professional assassins we're seeing in Iraq and elsewhere were veterinarians and bookkeepers a year ago.

Did you also believe in stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, or that the Iraqis would greet the GIs with thrown flowers?

In reality, according to the interviews with the fighters I've read as part of the non-American press, the majority are just that - simple civilians (such as students) who are pissed off enough to take up arms against an occupying army. There may be a contigent of foreign fighters (who are no doubt stoking the fire, probably by staging such things as the Johnson murder) - but most of the people getting in on the action are Iraqi nationalists.

Why is it Americans prattle endlessly about "liberty" and "freedom" with regard their own history, but fail to see that other people might resort to violence in an attempt to throw out an occupying army? Is there something taught in American schools that says that only white people can engage in revolutions against tyranny, and brown people can only engage in terrorism?

I really can't understand why people who make such a fuss about their own glorious revolution are in such denial about why other peoples choose to take up arms.

You know what? They're not going to kill me. They're probably not going to kill any of you. What is it with you people and your hysterical fear? You don't sound like Americans, you sound like cowards, driven to the precipice of race hatred and genocide by a handful of sick gangsters.

They murdered a guy. A brutal, reprehensible, barbaric, unthinkable act. What a surprise--terrorists are bad! Was anyone murdered in the bad part of your town that day? Do you think every person in the house next-door, in that neighborhood, city, county, state--do you think every person in the same zip code, ethnic group, or nationality deserves to die for that crime?

Michele, you hold up one U.S. contractor being prosecuted for murder nearly two years late and say, "Please don't say we're as bad as them," and then you toy with the idea of regional war on the lot of them. Yes, you couch and caveat it, but you open the door to your audience of knee-jerk kill-em-all'ers, and they are happy to flood your comments page.

People who have crossed the terrorist line are certainly criminals, irreparably corrupt, and should be hunted down like the bloodthirsty animals they are. If those of you advocating war on the entire region were just irresponsibly venting your frustrations by calling for actions you would never truly advocate, then your sentiments are understandable, but voicing them is still destructive.

Indeed, wake up, America. Wake the hell up to what the decadent Saudi system, with which we are in bed due to our reliance on its oil, has done to two or three of its generations. Look at how our Saudi "allies" encouraged their people to demonize us, while they smile and take our money and pull strings to get their people out of our country when the products of their corruption seek the revenge they encouraged.

Wake the hell up to the history of Iraq and Iran, both of which we were allies with during their most oppressive periods.

We were allied with nasty, repressive regimes because it served our strategic interests, and as a result, we have engendered much hatred. We are, after all, the top dogs. Who else should they hate?

And yet the vast majority still care only to live their lives and raise their children, just like all of us want to. And they are as powerless before their own governments as they are against the mighty war machine with which you would crush them--innocent men, women, and children, doubly repressed by their governments' corruption and our power. Where is your compassion, conservatives?

Unlike the nations you would declare war on in the Middle East, the average American actually DOES have a say in what its gov't does. So, if you don't like what our policies have reaped, where were you when we were supporting the Shah, Saddam, and still Saudi Arabia, while they were brutally repressing their people? Why didn't you, with your highly developed sense of moral rectitude, protest and vote against the actions that your democratically elected representatives were allowing? Did you not guess that people would chafe, revolt, and be warped by generations of torture and repression?

I don't hate America. I don't even know if we could have done very many things very differently. We were human, after all, and humans take the easy way.

But you forfeit all your claims to moral justification when you talk about slaughtering innocents en masse to avenge the crimes of a few of their countrymen--a corrupt few who are not brilliant supervillains, no matter how badly they scared you on 9/11. This DOES NOT MERIT World War IV, or whatever we're up to now.

Yes, this is a war. It's a war on the right side of which many in the Arab world would join us, if we weren't going about it so ignorantly and "accidentally" killing so many of them. It's a war that's going to be long and challenging whether we fight it the right way or the wrong way. I'm reading a lot of voices here advocating the wrong way, the ignorant way, the immoral way.

You're Americans. Get over your fear and fucking act like it. This paranoid, racist, warmongering bloodlust--it's disgusting. I love America, and you do not represent us.

"In reality, according to the interviews with the fighters I've read as part of the non-American press, the majority are just that - simple civilians (such as students) who are pissed off enough to take up arms against an occupying army."

Wow, really? Not just interviews but interviews. Well. If you boldface it it must be credible. No capacity for deception (even self-deception) among those Iraqi nationalists, is there? They must be special people indeed.

I sat through the C-SPAN interview with that guy from Harper's who wrote such a glowing piece on the "Resistance" in Iraq. He seemed like a perfectly intelligent guy, but he wasn't expending even 1 percent of his capacity for critical reasoning in his interviews with these "Resistance" members. I didn't see any internal questioning going on at all. I think he's after Duranty's Pulitzer.

If you'll share with us a link that actually kicks the tires on this argument of yours rather than simply parroting back "they are not fascist dead-enders or millennialist psychos because they said so" I promise I'll read it.

As for the stockpiles, I believed what UNSCOM and (as far as I can tell) all of the Western intelligence services told me -- there were plenty of CW and BW unaccounted for, Hussein could have benefited from documenting their complete destruction, and yet didn't do so. Post - 9-11, and in a world of terrorist proxies, I view that as an unacceptable risk.

If you'll share with us a link [...]

You mentioned seeing a CSPAN interview.

On the other hand, please provide evidence of your assertion: "Phoenician, the car bombers and wannabe headsmen don't give a f*ck about those dead kids, and you and I both know it."

Again, some don't (including probably those stoking the fires through the executions on video), but many if not most of those taking up arms against an occupying army do. The majority of the resistance in Iraq is not coming from Al Qaeda, or from terrorists - but from Iraqis who resent America invading and occupying their country.

Elsewhere they're called "freedom fighters".

Help me out here, because I don't understand the structure of your last post. I asked you to post a link that attempts to critically assess the claims of the "Resistance" that they're not Ba'athist remnants or foreign fighters, and you point out that I referred to a man interviewed on Washington Journal. I don't get what you're suggesting. Forgive me if I can't parse the logic of what I assume is some sort of argument. Here's the interview link (first item returned):
http://www.c-span.org/search/basic.asp?ResultStart=1&ResultCount=10&BasicQueryText=harper%27s

You indicated that you'd seen interviews with the "Resistance," so it should be plenty easy to find some pieces you can link to that attempt to investigate the claims these men are making about their pasts. I'd still like you to do that.

As for my claims, I don't have to look beyond the methods of a car bomber or hacksaw-wielding executioner to support them. You don't go from being a dental hygienist or history major to being a car bomber or headsman that quickly. It requires training to build a car bomb, or a profound indoctrination/radicalization process to dehumanize the person you're going to slaughter with your bare hands, or both.

And car bombers have killed kids in Iraq -- here's proof from a source that's probably already in your Favorites:
http://www.robert-fisk.com/articles372.htm

This attack sounds like it was deliberately structured to kill families, including kids.

http://www.messenger-inquirer.com/news/war/7085145.htm

This one killed schoolchildren. I could find a lot more.

Yup, it's the work of the Iraqi Ethan Allen.

Hi renato,

Boy that was a lot of work on your part. Too bad I didn't read it. I saw your name, and skipped the whole post. All that work for nothing, eh?

And we can keep playing this game forever. Trust me, I'm extremely amused by the whole thing.

What part of I don't care what you think escapes you? Do you think that one more post from you is going to make a difference? I DON'T DEBATE PEOPLE LIKE YOU. You came in here from the start with a snide, insulting attitude, and you've gotten exactly what you deserve.

So keep posting. Please.

You indicated that you'd seen interviews with the "Resistance," so it should be plenty easy to find some pieces you can link to that attempt to investigate the claims these men are making about their pasts. I'd still like you to do that.

Such as this?

"Over the past three months, TIME has interviewed dozens of insurgents and disgruntled Iraqis, attended resistance meetings and viewed videotape of attacks against coalition forces. [...] As seen from the inside, the insurgency looks as complex and diverse an enemy as the U.S. could possibly face. [...]

"Under the apparent leadership of experienced former Saddam loyalists, the resistance network is growing more organized. [...]

"Not all the rank-and-file fighters are die-hard Saddam supporters. Many are thought to be devout Iraqi Muslims who believe that fighting "infidel" occupiers is a Koranic imperative. [...] "Suicide bombers are generally not Iraqis or former regime types." Abu Abdullah, who earns his living building houses along the Euphrates River , says, "Islam tells us that no one should occupy our land. The Koran allows us to kill anyone to defend our country."

Your turn now. Show that the people hacking off heads represent most of the resistance to the occupation. Show that the majority of the people shooting at American soldiers are not Iraqi. Show that it is impossible for Iraqis, led by members of their former armed forces and by Saddamists, to have the technical capability to build car bombs.

Or don't bother. After all, wingnut tactic number 4 is to fling out unfounded assertions, claim the burden of proof is on the other side, and never ever accept anything other than the party line as evidence.

You may not realize it, but the link you provided makes my case for me.

My request: post a link that attempts to critically assess the claims of the "Resistance" that they're not Ba'athist remnants or foreign fighters (underline added)

Ba'athist dead-enders (Under the apparent leadership of experienced former Saddam loyalists) and religious nutcases ("The Koran allows us to kill anyone to defend our country"), just like I said.

Your TIME link says the insurgents are:

loyalists of the former ruling Baath Party, Fedayeen militiamen, former Republican Guard and intelligence agents, foreign jihadis, professional terrorists, paid common criminals and disaffected Iraqis

OK, so there are some "disaffected Iraqis" mentioned at the end of that list. They do keep odd company, don't they? They're being led by precisely the sort of people I suggested. And what confirmation do we have that even these "disaffected Iraqis" were telling the truth?

You haven't yet satisfied the requirements of my request. As for your demands of me, they don't follow logically from my statements.

And do you really intend to champion the cause of the folks running the "Resistance"? Authentic fascists, the lot of them.

Sorry, Renato, but you "lose". You lose, not because BB isn't debating, but because you just don't get it. Allow me to hazard a guess... You spend a lot of time in "Acedamia"?

Michelle:

The comment from "jheka" above is from my stalker. Please delete it when you have a chance. Thanks.