Nov 25 2006

Democrats Face Test In Iraq

Published by at 11:43 am under All General Discussions,Iraq

The terrorists and insurgents are acting as I and many predicted, they are becoming much more violent as they try to make sure the Democrats make good on their promise and surrender Iraq to Al Qaeda. The problem for the terrorists and insurgents is the American people will not accept handing Iraq over to the Islamo Fascists. The Democrats claimed our departure would force the Iraq government to stand up to their task (as if they weren’t doing so???). So here is the result of Democrat promises to date on Iraq – bloodsher and disorder as the terrorists plan for the Democrats to fulfill both the dreams of liberals and terrrorists allike:

The Bush administration charged yesterday that the escalating violence in Iraq committed by both Shiites and Sunnis over the past two days is a “brazen effort” to bring down the fragile government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

The White House also said President Bush has no intention of backing out of talks next week with the Iraqi leader, despite threats yesterday from a powerful Shiite militia to pull out of the government if Maliki goes ahead with the meeting. The talks, set for Thursday in Amman, Jordan, have suddenly taken on the air of a crisis summit, as Iraq slides closer to all-out civil war.

The Democrats never said they would pull out so the country COULD devolve into bloody civil war and the democratically elected government would be overthrown. There was no election promise to accelerate the fall of Iraq. The truth is the current hope for US surrender can be and should be laid at the feet of the Democrats here in the US who gave the world the impression they would run from the Islamo-Fascists if elected. Sadly there are enough ignorant people across the world who actually believed the Democrats. Or at least believed they had the power and will to force a surrender on Bush. But the Democrats have neither will, nor power nor intentions of surrendering. They made things worse and now they will be held accountable.

As unfair as it seems, the current situation is now owned by Bush and the Democrats. They have sufficient political power right now to start to form the debate and set the expectations. They are doing nothing. They are like deer in the headlights. They won, and as predicted, they have no clue what to do right now.

Bush is right, as is Maliki. If we show no sign of folding (got that Dems – no sign, as in unified front, as in one American policy, as in standing shoulder to shoulder with our men and women in harms way, were politics should end at the shoreline of our country) then the Iraqis will hold firm. They will only crumble if the US is sure to depart. Al Qaeda is on the verge of losing its fantasy Capitol City of their Modern Caliphate – Ramadi, Iraq. And they hope and optimism now flowing through the insurgents can be squashed easily by Democrats coming out and standing firm that they will not allow Iraq’s democracy to fail from a simple lack of will. Yes, if things blow out of control that is one thing. But simply having to stand up and say “we will support the democratically elected government of Iraq as it gains control of the entire nation” is not a huge price to pay to actually crush the Islamo Fascist movement. Is it Dems? You won’t even have to institute a draft to be seen as taking a winning position. These are just words, I am sure Dems can find the stamina to get past the gag-reflex and spit them out with some modicum of conviction. One thing dems are good at is spitting out words with faux conviction!

One other thing to keep in mind with all great wars – the fighting and dying hit a fevered pitch right when the pivotal test of wills is occurring. As with WW II and the Battle of The Bulge, which was Hitler’s last gasp, the death tolls during these periods can be the most intense of the entire war (see my previous post here). This has been true throughout time – from the Battle at Antietem in the civil war to the Road To Iraq in Gulf War I (where there was a massive killing of the Iraqi’s as they feld Kuwait) there fighting hits a fevered pitch right at the point the final outcome is decided. If we are at that point we simply need to stand firm and behind the less than one year old Maliki government. And if the Maliki government survives this test, it will be stable for quite some time to come. The press and the left is simply panicking (or some who are rejoicing in the bloodshed). Don’t mind them, they never grasped the situation and understood how to succeed.

Update: Something to consider from Pierre Legrand concerning the common threat we all face and how to understand what it represents. And it represents this question: Is America still ascending through history – or are we declining?

80 responses so far

80 Responses to “Democrats Face Test In Iraq”

  1. For Enforcement says:

    Ken, even tho it was against my better judgement, I looked at that liberal rag WaPo article you linked to and would you believe it. They advocate dropping the term “terrorist group” as it applies to Al qaeda? Well, yea you would believe it.

    Ken?
    Health care under the Baathist regime? Yep, get sick, they chop off your head. Erectile dysfunction, they’ll send your wife to a rape room for you. Yes, Kenny I’m sure they’re missing all those bennies.

    If Saddam had stayed in Kuwait, it wouldn’t have affected the price of oil. So you base your foreign policy on the price of oil, huh? To hell with the People enslaved by Saddam. Good philosophy, Ken.

    Cochino, unlike Ken wishing me away. I actually petitioned AJ to keep Ken on the site so we can always see what he’s thinking. He is a walking, talking advertisement for all the bad things in the world. It takes one hell of a person to advocate “higher losses in our military in Iraq’ Let me ask you, have you ever heard another American say that?
    One other tactic of Ken is to link you to all the liberal rags in the world or quote a Berkeley Prof or Noam Chomsky. He knows all those ‘progressives’.

    Ken even states that we lost in Iraq and at the same time, are the occupiers. Can you imagine having Japan occupy the US after they lost WWII? Usually it’s the winners that occupy, right?

    But that’s just Ken, what the Hell?

  2. lurker9876 says:

    Regarding Rumsfeld…funny….

    These tortures are the norm for some of our own soldiers to go through at one of their boot camps. There is a name for it but I don’t remember it.

  3. Bikerken says:

    You know Ken, theres an old saying, “When twelve men tell you you’re drunk, sit down.” Let me respond to your random reasoning one at a time. By the way, are you from Berkeley. You have that perstistant non-sensical finatical self hatred that most people never experience unless you’re from somewhere like Berkeley CA. Just guessing. Anyhow. as for we would still be propping up a government in Vietnam, do you mean a government that the people wanted? instead of having two million people slaughtered for the sake of communism? Yeah, I guess that would have been truly assinine for us to do.

    You’re second point is based on the assumption that we are an “Occupier”. I have close friends in Iraq who don’t think this is the case. As a matter of fact, the vast majority of Iraqis do not view us as occupiers. There is a lot of deception being practiced on the polling of Iraqis. While it is true that they would be happier if we were gone, it is also true that they don’t want us to leave until the country is stable. When you leave the second part out, it presents a whole new picture. This is the kind of thing that I blame the dems for. They tell the half of the story that doesn’t matter without the other half.

    As for what our founders intended. I always get a kick out of liberals invoking the intentions of our forefathers. I dont think our fore-fathers ever would have condoned abortion, or gay marriage. I don’t think that they would have outlawed nativity scenes in public places, or prayer in schools. I don’t think they would have foreseen many of the far left wing issues that creep around the voters will by judge shopping in the ninth circuit court of appeals. I’m amazed at how one can see all of these things which are not mentioned in the constitution but can justify any liberal cause which they are in favor of. You really gotta do some twisting to see it that way. I don’t think our fore-fathers ever envisioned a world where anything having to do with god would be stricken from the public view for fear of “offending” someone. I also think the reason they came here to begin with had something to do with the freedom of religious expression. As for not being a big brother to the world, at the time we were founded, we weren’t much of anything as far as a nation goes. We were small and poorly defended. That was a totally different situation that we have today. So, it is not suprising that the fore-fathers, (who indeed, warned about foreign entanglments), did not realize that someday we would be the richest and most powerful nation on earth. If they had, I would have bet that they would have had something different to say about our involvement in the world. I just don’t believe that people who struck out on their own in such a dramatic and risky manner to achieve freedom would be such cowards as to shrink in fear when their peers were attacked.

    And for the last part Ken, you said this, “And for you to naievely believe Moslem indignation at our meddlin in their part of the world isn’t the driving force for their defensive “aggression” is just that-naeivete. MY GOD, how can you be so damn stupid!!! First of all, DEFENSIVE AGGRESSION is a contradiction in terms! If the United States did not even exist, this situation would still be the same. The cult of Islam is hate and killing everything that is not Muslim. This has been going on since long before the pilgrims boarded the Mayflower. I’m curious at to how sawing Daniel Bergs head off is “defensive vice aggression” . That was just pure hate and evil. I still haven’t heard you utter one syllable in response to my question, If the US is to blame for all the Islamic chaos in the world, why are they attacking people all over the world who have little or nothing to do with the US? Let me give you a clue, WE ARE NOT THE PROBLEM!! PEOPLE WHO SAW OFF THE HEADS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE ARE NUTS!!!!!!!! Don’t you get that?!

    Of course not, I didn’t expect you to. Ken, you are blinded by a kind of hatred that is so severe, that I really do feel some sympathy for you. If you can’t see the difference between honorable young US Marines out there trying to save peoples lives and people who saw innocents heads off, you are absolutely beyond simple conversation and in need of some real psychiatric therapy. Have you ever watched the Daniel Berg video? They sawed off the head of a 19 year old kid who naively went to Iraq to help people . If you don’t understand the pure evil of this act, you have a real problem. I’m not saying that just because I don’t agree with you on the issues. I don’t expect everyone to agree with me and that’s fine. But man, you are really in some deep denial. I really wouldn’t want to walk a day in your shoes because I would hate to see what the world looks like in your eyes.

    That being the case Ken, and that is the case, it is so hard for me to take you seriously about anything. You make no sense at all, you spout the most convaluted twisted logic you can dream up all to bring it back to your main theme, “It’s all our fault, and whatever happens in the future will be our fault for what we will do in the future.” You’re like the ex-wife from hell. If you ever want to have any credibility, you have to make sense once in a while. You never seem to be restrained by that idea.

    You really are from Berkeley, aren’t you??

  4. Ken says:

    Bikerken

    You’re crazy. The vast majority of Iraqis want US troops killed,
    about 70% approving of attacks on them by the insurgency.

    You’re an ignoramus,got it? They do not believe we are capable of
    stabilizing Iraq and they are correct. Now, almost all
    Shias, the dominant group want us out and more than half the Sunnis.

    The “deception’ being practised is not by the consistent Iraqi polls which have shown majorities have wanted us gone,no strings attached,since 2004, but by the Bush administration and the neocons,and fanatics like you who believe America always gets its way if it perserveres, as in Vietnam.

    And I’m a conservative nationalist America Firster, not a Wilsonian
    liberal,which you are ,whether aware of it or not. I reccommend
    a subscription to Pat Buchanan’s amconmag.com for starters.

    The Iraqis despise us for ruining their country-even those whom hated Saddam. And you would be lucky to escape their wrath if they could get at you after reading your liberal Wilsonian foolery which presumes your country knew what was best for them.

    Again, amconmag.com will show you what real conservatism is,not to be confused with that approved by Big Oil and the Israeli Lobby.

  5. For Enforcement says:

    Kenny said:

    And I’m a conservative nationalist America Firster, not a Wilsonian
    liberal,

    And just remember, 100% wrong 100% of the time, certified.

    Ken, are you saying that all the ” conservative nationalist America Firster” people, like you, are for the maximum number of fatalities among US military in Iraq?
    Let me see if I can say this clearly, Bullsh*t.

    You can sit down now.

  6. Ken says:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-2471863,00.html

    now the US is killing large numbers of students in schools on the opposite side of the globe and blaming it on other governments.

    with this kind of For Enforcement morality, don’t blame anyhting else for the next attack on US soil.

  7. ivehadit says:

    Ahhhh….Pat Buchanan…
    I should have known.
    I am so not interested in reading anything from that “ist”-restrictionist/isolationist/pessimist/defeatist betrayer of my beloved America, the Beautiful.

  8. For Enforcement says:

    Ken, I would say that you’ve totally lost your mind, but that would imply that you had one to start with.

    When is your 3rd birthday? (mental age)

    And the country that left the British empire under Churchill is?

    Liberal rag links? That a new tactic?
    Give our regards to Jacque.

  9. Bikerken says:

    HELP! HELP! HELP! Someone throw Ken a life preserver, I think he’s gone off the deep end!!

    Think I touched a nerve or two?

  10. Ken says:

    Bikerken-

    You fell off your dirt bike once too often, biker.But who’s going to have the last laugh when the US departs Iraq ingloriously?

  11. cochino says:

    Ken,
    I’m willing to engage you on this, but you are obviously being very disingenuous. You can’t be serious with these posts. You even misrepresented your own linked article. It doesn’t say the U.S. blamed another government. Actually, the article even appears to be neutral on the idea that those killed were, in fact, young “students”. Why did you say what you said?

  12. cochino says:

    Ken,
    Excuse me, but did you just intimate that you are going to have a “laugh” when the U.S. leaves Iraq “ingloriously”?

  13. Ken says:

    For Enforcement

    You’re the one who wants the soldiers to stay and be killed and maimed in Iraq. I have advocated withdrawal since 2003, knowing
    victory was impossible.

    But as long as they stay, they are responsible for keeping the peace under Geneva. If the US policy is “stay and get out of the way and
    let them kill each other” as you express, it disgraces itself and
    karma awaits.

  14. Ken says:

    Cochino
    “Why did you say what you said? ”

    Because I understand how imperialists operate. In this case, the
    Pakistani government had its “suggestions”…(orders.)

  15. Ken says:

    Cochino-“Excuse me, but did you just intimate that you are going to have a “laugh” when the U.S. leaves Iraq “ingloriously?”

    The Middle East will be better for it when American influence is
    expurgated from its region. America the nation as opposed to American Empire will also better for it. Expulsion from areas which are none of our concern will allow us to focus on our domestic problems, chief among them the Hispanic invasion.

  16. For Enforcement says:

    Cochino, you were forewarned about Ken, he is the only American(he says he’s American, but I have my doubts) that I have actually heard pulling for American troops to be killed in Iraq. He just reconfirmed that with his last post.
    Ken is ONLY dis-ingenuous. He will find all kinds of liberal rag links, even those that don’t support him. Give all kinds of wild statements, never expects to be called on them and when he is gives another link to some other flaming liberal site. All the while speaking in tongues.
    The only original thought he has had is this business about hoping the worst for US military persons in Iraq. That is truly original.

    Yes bikerken, Ken was already off the deep end, he’s just continuing to dig.

  17. Bikerken says:

    No dirt bikes ken, Harleys, I have three of them. I am a capitalist after all. Have’nt fallen off in over twenty years.

    Cochino, For Enforcement. This statement sizes up ken very nicely, “But who’s going to have the last laugh when the US departs Iraq ingloriously?

    That is who he is.

    When I worked at the Pacific Missile Test Center up at Pt. Mugu CA. The Range Control Officer had a sign on his door that said, “Sometimes when you are wrestling in the mud with a pig, it starts to dawn on you that the pig is enjoying it.” Sometimes I think this is the case with ken because he can’t be serious.

  18. ivehadit says:

    “It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, “Citizenship in a Republic,”Speech at the Sorbonne, Paris, April 23, 1910

  19. cochino says:

    Ken,
    I can’t take this anymore. American Empire? You can’t be serious! The last true empire to exist on Earth was the Ottoman Empire. It’s strange you should bring it up, too, because that’s what we’re fighting now in the Middle East. I don’t what you learned in your undergraduate history class, but Arab nationalism is directly descended from the Turks and their bloody empire (well known, but look here http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/OTTOMAN/OTTOMAN1.HTM).

    If you look deep enough (even in liberal publications like the New York Times), you’d know that Turkey’s recent acquisition of leadership positions throughout the Middle East (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/turkey/index.html?inline=nyt-geo) should make everyone nervous.

    Do you think that the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko with polonium 210 is a coincidence? Besides the United States, what other country has this technology? Hint: http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=105&sid=986268.

    As far as the link between Saddam and al Qaeda, even Senator Levin has come around on that issue (http://www.nysun.com/article/44054?page_no=1).

    We’re not the imperialists, Ken. That’s why (excluding several years in the mid-1890’s) the U.S. has never truly “occupied” foreign soil. It’s all smoke and mirrors. The Founding Fathers of this nation understood the link between our freedom and fighting threats abroad. Through their own writings, we know that both Jefferson and Madison understood this. Hell, the U.S.-Mexican War of 1846-48 can be looked at as a kind of preemptive war.

    Sorry to have to point out your ignorance, Ken, but you asked for it.