Pulling out of Iraq at this point - whether a pellmell retreat or a gradual standown - is out of the question, because we've already opened the proverbial pandora's box. It cannot simply be shut and have us walk away from it.
I recall what happened in Southeast Asia after we reached a "peace with honor" with the North Vietnamese, and after Congress dried up foreign aid to South Vietnam. For those who may not be old enough, let me remind you.
Thousands of people clambered onto the roof of the American embassy as we pulled out last soldiers out of the country. The Vietcong were heading to Saigon, and panic set in among the population. Babies were handed to strangers in a hope that they might escape the coming catastrophe. People screamed, cried and did their best to leave their homeland because they understood what was about to occur.
After the dust settled, the Vietcong turned upon their relatives in formerly South Vietnam. For well over the next decade, hundreds of thousands of people who became known as "the boat people" climbed on board virtually anything that would float and headed out to the South China Sea. There seemed to be no end in sight. Then, the Vietcong turned on their neighbors, Laos and Cambodia. The domino theory about communism that had been held as the reason for our involvement in Southeast Asia proved errily and stunningly accurate. As Laos, Burma, and Cambodia fell into chaos and repressive regimes. The liberal American politicians and their sidekicks, the antique media, did their best to avoid acknowledging the truth that we had been warned about by Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnnson and Nixon. Once Vietnam fell, the rest of the region followed suit.
If there are any comparisons to Vietnam in the Iraq war, this is one I would seriously like to avoid. I don't see the Dems having enough backbone to attempt to choke off funding for the current conflict. They don't have enough intellectual integrity to admit that their opposition is based more on their lust for power than on a true, reasoned objection to the war. There may be a few representatives who actually base their opposition to the war on genuine philosophic differences, but I believe that they are few among them.
I agree that they should either put their campaign money where their mouths are, or shut up, sit down, and come up with a plan for our future. That plan should go beyond the "dig in our heels, resist all initiatives, and carp loudly about how wrong the President is" that they've been practicing for the past five years or so.
Let them run like Eugene McCarthy or Hubert Humphrey. Let them passionately present their case for why their leadership is worthy of consideration. And let the voters engage in the only poll that matters - the general election.
As disgusted as I am with the Republican party in general, and the President specifically on issues not related to the Iraq War, I cannot bring myself to pull the lever (or punch the touchscreen) for any party with a "D" by their name. As things stand now, I intend to revert to my prior practice of voting against every incumbent and for every third party candidate that is presented to me on a ballot. I will work to develop an alternative political party to the Republicrats and the Demublicans, because, other than the War on Terror, they are two sides of the same old, tired, worn-out coin.
I'm proud that I voted for George W. Bush in 2004, but don't anticipate those feeling carrying any capital over to his party. They are as pitiful in their shortsightedness and pandering as the Democrats are.
But back to the point of this blog topic. The war has not been lost on the battlefield, even as it's being waged in the halls of Congress and across the airwaves and in print across this country. Let the leftists continue to bray at each other, and at us, about how the tide is turning.
That's all they have left, except for a few well-placed liberal justices across the nation...
You're right on point, Mark, but the donks will never see this. If we've created such a mess in Iraq, an irrepairable mess, then the Dems in Congress should move to stop funding. It it were such a mess as they say, I could name at least 20 Republicans who would side with them on cutting funding. I would expect all members of Congress to cut funding for a lost cause.
C'mon, Dingy Harry, c'mon, Bella Pelosi--put your money where your mouths are...
You're right on point, Mark, but the donks will never see this. If we've created such a mess in Iraq, an irrepairable mess, then the Dems in Congress should move to stop funding. It it were such a mess as they say, I could name at least 20 Republicans who would side with them on cutting funding. I would expect all members of Congress to cut funding for a lost cause.
C'mon, Dingy Harry, c'mon, Bella Pelosi--put your money where your mouths are...
Karol of Alarming News seemed real objective going in. Kinda like I would be attending a Young Republicans marshmallow toast.
Have you ever considered just doing 'open mic' in here on Cindy Sheehan???
Ok, I loved that she started that demonstration by Bush's ranch, and for some reason I thought Bush would come out, speak to her, and that would be the end of it.
Now, I hear her flipping name all the time. If she misses a war protest, they call her up to get her point of view. How did America let some angry mother become an icon??? I mean, Jane Fonda is one thing...she was an actress, and pretty hot at that...I'm sure not too many people complained when she was ripping off her bras in public. Cindy is an old hag...can't we get someone like Pam Anderson back out there on the protest trail???
Ash,
Who said she was unbiased? But she does bring us a picture of the so-called "anti war" movement...and it ain't pretty.
I think you guys are missing the point. Just because it was a stupid decision and horribly run doesn't mean we can just leave the Iraqis high and dry. We have to finish what we started, no matter what, it's impossible to do the right thing by just packing everything up, we will be blamed for the bloody aftermath. We have to get these war profiteers out of control and work our way out. That or just let it collapse and then bunker down until it settles itself.
Hey steve, the phrase is "hunker down," not "bunker down." peace
Where was Whoppi...anybody seen Whoppi lately?
Probably still getting her 'bush' xeroxed for the doctor....those liberal cooties even give steve the willies I bet. Sheehan didn't go to Germany because she knew what awaited her, so she falsely claimed she was hurt during an arrest. Yeah, her feelings...what a slut...a champion for the castrati.
I'm from texas, I say both. I don't know where you are from or where you live, but don't mess with me on my twang fool. Bunker down actually makes more sense though
After discussing I conceed that bunker down is not common usage. Good point keefer, keep up on the issues.
In the navy bunker down meant the lower bunk. Bunker up was the upper one. Some of them had 3-4 high so bunker middle or bunker middle down. But basically those were just bunks. And hunker is what the girls were in foreign ports.... Right Steve?
Or was that: hunker down in the bunker up during a storm. bunker down in a hunker up storm.
After every sitting politician is voted out of office in November, the center of gravity will shift. Why is the United States building permanent bases in Iraq? We need to be leaving now, not after 20,000 additional casulties occur. Peace
*Chuckles*
Anyway, getting beyond the "twang" and back to the post. I too have been hearing lots about this "upswell" of anti-war "ferver." Yet even though I'm here on the left coast, I'm not really seeing it.
I'm not seeing protests every weekend or huge marches. I'm not seeing people handing out flyers at every mall or trying to "raise awareness." Isn't that what happened in the 60's during the big anti-war movement? (I don't know from first hand so I'm looking toward my elders here.)
In fact right now half of the pettitions running around right now are conservative ideas. Another abortion notification one, an eminent domain one (though I think that should be more than just conservative), and those are just the top two I can recall. (There are like 10 running around in my area alone!) Now I do live next to a military base but I would think that would make me more of a target of these protests and the perfect place for this groundswell of anti-war feelings!
dl,
I think it's spring forward, fall back.
As Rush pointed out on the radio..........
'nuff said about the integrity of some comments on this site.
Oxycontin cocktail talk is cheap.
After discussing I conceed that bunker down is not common usage. Good point keefer, keep up on the issues.
Actually, stevie, it's "concede..."
Once again, always right on top of those issues. I'm sorry Keefer, I left the "e" off of millionaire, and I accidently hit the "e" out of place on concede. I appologize and hope you can forgive me.
Steve
Keefer is a frustrated English teacher who has a hard time putting two words together in his attempt to worship Bush. He should be asking your forgiveness.
Pulling out of Iraq at this point - whether a pellmell retreat or a gradual standown - is out of the question, because we've already opened the proverbial pandora's box. It cannot simply be shut and have us walk away from it.
I recall what happened in Southeast Asia after we reached a "peace with honor" with the North Vietnamese, and after Congress dried up foreign aid to South Vietnam. For those who may not be old enough, let me remind you.
Thousands of people clambered onto the roof of the American embassy as we pulled out last soldiers out of the country. The Vietcong were heading to Saigon, and panic set in among the population. Babies were handed to strangers in a hope that they might escape the coming catastrophe. People screamed, cried and did their best to leave their homeland because they understood what was about to occur.
After the dust settled, the Vietcong turned upon their relatives in formerly South Vietnam. For well over the next decade, hundreds of thousands of people who became known as "the boat people" climbed on board virtually anything that would float and headed out to the South China Sea. There seemed to be no end in sight. Then, the Vietcong turned on their neighbors, Laos and Cambodia. The domino theory about communism that had been held as the reason for our involvement in Southeast Asia proved errily and stunningly accurate. As Laos, Burma, and Cambodia fell into chaos and repressive regimes. The liberal American politicians and their sidekicks, the antique media, did their best to avoid acknowledging the truth that we had been warned about by Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnnson and Nixon. Once Vietnam fell, the rest of the region followed suit.
If there are any comparisons to Vietnam in the Iraq war, this is one I would seriously like to avoid. I don't see the Dems having enough backbone to attempt to choke off funding for the current conflict. They don't have enough intellectual integrity to admit that their opposition is based more on their lust for power than on a true, reasoned objection to the war. There may be a few representatives who actually base their opposition to the war on genuine philosophic differences, but I believe that they are few among them.
I agree that they should either put their campaign money where their mouths are, or shut up, sit down, and come up with a plan for our future. That plan should go beyond the "dig in our heels, resist all initiatives, and carp loudly about how wrong the President is" that they've been practicing for the past five years or so.
Let them run like Eugene McCarthy or Hubert Humphrey. Let them passionately present their case for why their leadership is worthy of consideration. And let the voters engage in the only poll that matters - the general election.
As disgusted as I am with the Republican party in general, and the President specifically on issues not related to the Iraq War, I cannot bring myself to pull the lever (or punch the touchscreen) for any party with a "D" by their name. As things stand now, I intend to revert to my prior practice of voting against every incumbent and for every third party candidate that is presented to me on a ballot. I will work to develop an alternative political party to the Republicrats and the Demublicans, because, other than the War on Terror, they are two sides of the same old, tired, worn-out coin.
I'm proud that I voted for George W. Bush in 2004, but don't anticipate those feeling carrying any capital over to his party. They are as pitiful in their shortsightedness and pandering as the Democrats are.
But back to the point of this blog topic. The war has not been lost on the battlefield, even as it's being waged in the halls of Congress and across the airwaves and in print across this country. Let the leftists continue to bray at each other, and at us, about how the tide is turning.
That's all they have left, except for a few well-placed liberal justices across the nation...
Cutting and running would be really stupid, however, if it does erupt into an all-out civil war, we probably should just stand on the sidelines and let the 'sand-nig#$%*' kill each other. Otherwise we'd be just as stupid as the cops trying to patrol Caprini Green in Chicago.
Who's coming with me? Who's comin' man???
Steve Earle, some old hippie looking sort-of country singer kicked the night off with a song called 'F*** the FCC' the lyrics of which are the extremely insightful "F*** the FCC, F*** the FBI, F*** the CIA, Livin' in the motherf***in' USA."
Sounds like the lyrics to most Ted Nugent songs. Are you sure that they are not really the same person?
Hey Folks,
They have already won. They had us beat the minute they suckered us into invading "the holy land" in the first place. Our troops can not leave -- and they are worst than useless while they stay. All we are doing is sitting in our "green zone" and posing as a really big recruiting poster for the jihadist. And all the while we run down our own treasury and they show the world the limits of our power.
In happened to the Brits in 1920 and it is happening to the US today.