May 05 2007

We Want An Iraq Civil War – Duh!

Published by at 7:24 am under All General Discussions,Diyala,Iraq

Linda Chavez made the obvious point many have missed in her article out today: The article is about whether or not Dems are anti-war or anti-troop. But the real question is will the Dems become anti-America? Here is the crux of all this – we want a small civil war in Iraq and we want one side to win and we need to make sure that side wins. Sound strange? Only to those in the surrendermedia and liberal far left echo chamnbers. Here is Chavez’s point:

The problem in Iraq is not the performance or the mission of American forces. The biggest problem is that Iraq has become a battleground in an Islamic jihad against not only America and the West, but non-Islamist Muslims. Al Qaeda targets the Shiite population, while Iran and its puppets in Iraq target the Sunnis. This is not civil war as commonly understood but a proxy war between two radical extremes in the Islamic world.

There is not fighting between the radical Islamo Fascists of the Shiia persuasion and the Sunni (al Qaeda) persuasion. The Islamo-Fascists are attacking the moderate Muslims trying to enrage them into sectarian violence. But so far it has not really worked. This is the war between Islamo Facists and ‘mainstream’ Muslims we have needed to take shape. The civil war is the extremists against the Arab/Muslim street.

For most of the Iraqi forces here the areas they patrol are familiar. They know the people, the area, and who does not belong. This is where they grew up.

“This is my home,” said one Iraqi policeman, who asked not to be identified due to concerns about his family’s safety. “We grew up here and know people here. (Terrorists) need to leave or they die here.”

This is a huge advantage for the U.S. military which has seen its share of conflict spring up in this area.

We cannot change Islam alone. We can ally with those Muslims who are willing to reject and throw off the Islamo Fascists. We see indications ALL OVER Iraq that the brutality of the Islamo Fascists is turning the tide in our direction. Anbar Province is now primarily aligned against al Qaeda and extremists. Diyala Province is following suit. In the broader sense Saudi Arabia is fighting back as is Jordan and Pakistan and Afghanistan. Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and The UAE are solidly against the Islamo Fascists. We have wanted the Muslims to take up this fight and stand for peace and co-existence and they are.

And this is the ‘civil war’ the Dems claim we do not want? This is the quagmire? No wonder they are known only for the most spectacular loss in America’s history. They are so oblivious they cannot see success when it is sprouting up all around them. The Hagel’s and Kerry’s of the world are known for their failure in Vietnam – and now they want company. They want a new generation of admirers who can claim ‘we failed just like you did’. They are not going to get them. This generation is more like my father’s – the WW II generation. They are smart, savvy, fearless – and for them ‘failure’ is still not an option. Watching the boomers fade is turning out to be a lot worse than I thought (I am at the tale end of the boomer generation). There are lots of great boomers – don’t get me wrong. President Bush comes to mind. But the group has some serious issues as we can see in the likes of Hagel and Kerry. They are so desperate to salvage their reputations that they become dedicated to creating another Vietnam no matter what the cost. Thankfully, they will fail at that too.

90 responses so far

90 Responses to “We Want An Iraq Civil War – Duh!”

  1. ivehadit says:

    When I saw the number of comments on this thread, I knew we had hit a nerve with the ssorosite. The ssorosite’s worldview is beyond words. And he THINKS he knows of what he speaks…NOT.

    As I stated he does NOT know the Bush family personally. Not one iota of personal knowledge does he have. ..the key word being know.

    Just watched the movie, “Charlotte Gray” which took place in France during WW2. Sad, sad, sad what the French let happen to themselves.

    Alas, sorosites, YOU WILL NEVER TURN US INTO FRANCE. EVER.

  2. MerlinOS2 says:

    AJ

    I agree with the concept over at JOM,

    WE NEED BETTER TROLLS!

  3. scaulen says:

    SS:
    Your right we should never had followed President Clinton’s plan of regime change in Iraq. We should have just disregarded anything his tenure in office produced in relationship to the middle East and terrorism, 20/20 hind sight and all being what it is.
    Saddam didn’t have any ties to terrorists??? I hate to say this, actually no I don’t, you are lying out your rear end. You can pretend meetings never happened, you can pretend a terrorist training camp wasn’t there, you can even pretend Saddam didn’t finance the families of suicide scum bag bombers. But.. You can not disprove a time line. How soon after the fall of Baghdad did terrorists start their evil ways? You can not tell me foreign terrorists just strolled into the country, and started establishing terrorists cells that quickly. Stockpiling ammo, weapons, commo, setting up safe houses, building car bombs, IED’s, training, fund raising, propaganda, jeez you name it, they had it ready to go. So a dictatorship, that had people watching, the people who were watching the people didn’t notice AQ, Syrians, Iranians, North Africans, and super mythical jihadi sniper may he wipe his ass with his right hand Juba set up shop??? You sir/ma’am are full of it to put it nicely. Dishonest, distrustful, disloyal.

  4. MerlinOS2 says:

    Scaulen

    To paraphrase Blazing Saddles

    Mr Scaulen , you got a tongue prettier than …you know the rest

    LOL

  5. lurker9876 says:

    We certainly can’t let Germany, Japan, South Korea go, can’t we?

    Give us a better argument than Scrowcroft stated in his article.

    We’re better off to invade Iraq. It’s also a strategic place for us.

    Merlin, SS-copperhead reminds us of someone over at JOM (plus DEMO).

  6. lurker9876 says:

    I watched Charlotte Grey several months ago. It was just so sad how people turned against each other used to be great friends. And how everyone had to fie for themselves…alone.

  7. lurker9876 says:

    Boy, what a trivial difference is between 33, 34, 35 versus 28. Who cares about the trivial difference, especially with the 22.8 spread.

  8. lurker9876 says:

    As for Bush 41, I didn’t say he had the authorization, I said the reason he didn’t was the very quagmire we are in now

    After 12 years of UN resolutions against Saddam, Oil for Food scandal and briberies, efforts to get those sanctions lifted, (as per UN 1441), Bush 41 should have gone in to finish the job back in 1991. Regardless, it remains the right and necessary decision to invade Iraq.

  9. MerlinOS2 says:

    Besides, 35 would have been a right number last week, the one recent 28 number poll pulled it down and that was a big shift from all the other numbers. Then sooth comes up with another 28 and does new math.

    Gosh guess we need to hunt up other polls to bring the math average up.

    Lurker they are similar but not the same I will email you why I believe that.

  10. scaulen says:

    Oh by the way nice cherry pick on Scowcroft, he and President Bush 41 discuss many reasons why it made no sense to take Baghdad. And this was from 1998 when their memories of the facts are still fresh. They seemed more worried about the Arab’s abandoning the coalition, overstepping the UN charter, destabilizing the Gulf, and the ability to even find Saddam. Yes they did worry about being conquerors, but it seems we side stepped that problem by letting the Iraqis elect their own government, and then being the iron fist for that elected government.

    http://www.thememoryhole.org/mil/bushsr-iraq.htm

  11. lurker9876 says:

    2. Bush’s polling numbers are now so abyssmal they are dragging down the entire GOP – acording to Newsweek, the leading Dem contenders ALL beat every GOP candidate in head to head numbers. Thank you kindly, Dubbya;

    And, btw, you harped about Bush’s number being so abysmal. 1 to 2 percent is so trivial compared to your abysmal choice of words and comments with thanks for Dubya.

    Gee, you can’t even spell!

  12. scaulen says:

    Merlin:
    What in the wild wild world of sports is goin on here?? Great movie

  13. MerlinOS2 says:

    Scaulen

    Have always been a Mel Brooks fan, also loved Young Frankenstein.

  14. MerlinOS2 says:

    I found I had to watch Blazing Saddles several times to catch all the gags I missed the first time through. Laughing so hard I missed some the first time. Not just verbal but multiple sight gags hidden under the radar.

    Generally I like send up movies as fun entertainment.

    Blazing Saddles
    Young Frankenstein
    Murder by Death
    Animal House
    Revenge of the Nerds
    Monty Python and the Holy Grail

    and so forth.

  15. MerlinOS2 says:

    Wow forgot

    It’s a Mad Mad Mad Mad World , a classic of the genre.
    Convoy
    and of course Smokey and the Bandit.

  16. lurker9876 says:

    Father Goose
    Fish Called Wanda

  17. MerlinOS2 says:

    McKales navy
    Operation Petticoat
    Pink Panther

    We could go on and on with these.

  18. scaulen says:

    Mel Brooks, if he had anything to do with it, I’ll watch it. Spaceballs, Get Smart, The Producers. Don’t forget Cannon Ball run, the Rat Pack and as many of their buddies that they could stuff into movie, Dom and Burt’s out takes were better then the movie. Back when stars could share the spot light. Every time I watch a Brooks movie I pick up something new also.

  19. MerlinOS2 says:

    Cat Ballou
    The Cheyenne Social Club

  20. MerlinOS2 says:

    High Anxiety was another good one by Mel.

    Plus he had his fingers in a lot of tv comedy over the years.

    Mad World was the classic because of the stellar cast that put it all together with no ego trips and resulted in a great collaboration that will stand the test of time.