I wonder when the left will...

[Yonivore]

...let us start fighting the war on terror like it needs to be fought.


http://www.investors.com/editorial/cartoons/IMAGES/cartoons/toon070207.gif

Japanese Propaganda and American Mass Media (http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htiw/articles/20070629.aspx)


June 29, 2007: U.S. troops have been mystified at how differently the war they fight in Iraq is portrayed by the U.S. media back home. Most just shrug it off as "politics," and yet another reason to not trust what the mass media presents as reliable reporting. But recently, the troops have been passing around an interesting discovery. Namely, that the Japanese psychological warfare effort during World War II included radio broadcasts that could be picked up by American troops. Popular music was played, but the commentary (by one of several English speaking Japanese women) always hammered away on the same points;

1 Your President (Franklin D Roosevelt) is lying to you.

2 This war is illegal.

3 You cannot win the war.

The troops are perplexed and somewhat amused that their own media is now sending out this message. Fighting the enemy in Iraq is simple, compared to figuring out what news editors are thinking back home. A few times, the mass media has been bold, or foolish, enough to confront the troops about this divergence of perceptions. The result is usually a surreal exchange, with the troops giving the journalist a "what planet are YOU from" look. Naturally, this sort of thing doesn't get much exposure. When pressed, a journalist or editor will dismiss the opinions of the troops (of all ranks), because they are "too close" to see "the big picture." For the same reason, reporters who send back material agreeing with the troops, find their stuff twisted into an acceptable shape, or not used at all. Historians will have a good time with all this.

[Yonivore]

...of defeat on behalf of the Democrats; they're making up news.


http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/558/abc2bheadlessrd5.th.jpg (http://img292.imageshack.us/my.php?image=abc2bheadlessrd5.jpg)

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/6987/cbs2bheadlesszc2.th.jpg (http://img292.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cbs2bheadlesszc2.jpg)
The Multi-National Forces Iraq (http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12611&Itemid=128) are now reporting after looking into the story that Confederate Yankee (http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/231831.php) brought to their attention a couple of days ago when the reported massacre was first reported by the Associated Press:


June 30, 2007
Release A070630c

Extremists using false media reporting to incite sectarian violence

BAGHDAD, Iraq – Friday, news media reported a mass killing in a village near Salman Pak where 20 men were allegedly found beheaded. It now appears that the story was completely false and fabricated by unknown sources.

Upon learning of the press reports, coalition and Iraqi officials began investigating to determine if the reports were true. Ultimately it was concluded the reports were false.

Anti-Iraqi Forces are known for purposely providing false information to the media to incite violence and revenge killings, and they may well have been the source of this misinformation.

“Extremists promote falsehoods of mass killings, collateral damage and other violence specifically to turn Iraqis against other Iraqis,” said Rear Admiral Mark Fox, spokesperson for MNF-I. “Unfortunately, lies are much easier to state, the truth often takes time to prove,” said Fox.

Not all media reports can be immediately substantiated by Government of Iraq or Coalition Forces. They must go through a process to verify such claims, to include checking with various Iraqi Ministry’s, local police and security forces. Meanwhile, extremists have achieved their goal of spreading false information aimed at intimidating civilians and destabilizing Iraqi security.

Ultimately, media reporting based on verifiable sources will reduce the possibility of misinformation unnecessarily alarming citizens.
Using verifiable sources?... That's a little too much to expect from today's media, Sir.

This isn't the first time. Anybody remember Jamail Hussein and the stories of the burning mosques and immolated Iraqis? No? Google it. It too was made up and it too was carried heavily by the mainstream media.

Strategy Page nailed it today, in that article I linked to in my previous post, explaining how the current Anti-Bush, Anti-American, Anti-Iraq War mainstream media is reporting news as if they are an enemy of the United States.

And all you lefties on this forum are guilty of being duped by a media complicit with the enemy. I hope you sleep well. No, on second thought, I hope you rot in hell...with your Islamo-fascist buddies you're so bent on defending.

Meanwhile... In what will probably not make many headlines- 26 Iranian Backed “Secret Cell” Operatives Killed, 17 Captured in Sadr City (http://billroggio.com/archives/2007/06/26_iranian_backed_se.php)

[boutons_]

Pussy Eater,

Nobody's stopping the war on terror.

How exactly are the left, progressives, independents or ANYBODY impeding the war on terror?

No evidence? Of course not. Nothing by slanderous allegations from the same shithole as your heroine Anne Cunter.

HOWEVER,

conservative/neo-cunt/criminal/oilco-sucker dickhead and his neo-cunt accomplices, plus their enabling stooge and puppet dubya, have profoundly subverted, and inflamed, the war on terror, to the huge, short/long-term detriment of the USA and other good guys.

Iraq is lost, and irretrievable, spiralling down towards a terrorist training facility (which it already is).

Afghanistan, was a much easier task, is still not stabilized nearly 6 years of half-assed trying and neglect by dickhead.

Pakistan teeters on the brink of a coup by the ever-strengthening, relentlessly encroaching Taleban (see my "Back at the Taleban ranch" post).

[George Gervin's Afro]

Using verifiable sources?... That's a little too much to expect from today's media, Sir.


It's kind of funny to hear you run with a story but this one really takes the cake. Yoni and Ray are by far the biggest Iraq war whores here on the forum and they defend Bush without hesitation on his evidence/rationale for starting the WMD-Liberation experiment gone bad. Now that we know almost every reason why Bush said we to invade Iraq as quick as we did is wrong or inaccurate theri is silence. BUt now we get lectures about the press not using verifible sources. So now to the dead enders starting a war is ok without verifiable sources but they hammer the evil press for doing the same thing..

[Yonivore]

Using verifiable sources?... That's a little too much to expect from today's media, Sir.


It's kind of funny to hear you run with a story but this one really takes the cake. Yoni and Ray are by far the biggest Iraq war whores here on the forum and they defend Bush without hesitation on his evidence/rationale for starting the WMD-Liberation experiment gone bad. Now that we know almost every reason why Bush said we to invade Iraq as quick as we did is wrong or inaccurate theri is silence. BUt now we get lectures about the press not using verifible sources. So now to the dead enders starting a war is ok without verifiable sources but they hammer the evil press for doing the same thing..
You're blithering...make sense, will you?

[spurster]

Yes, let's go after OBL and the Taliban. Are they in Iraq and Iran?

[Yonivore]

Yes, let's go after OBL and the Taliban. Are they in Iraq and Iran?
Yes, as a matter of fact, they are. Well, OBL anyway.

[Yonivore]

9/11 Commission Finds Ties Between al-Qaeda and Iran (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,664967,00.html)

Iraqis Join U.S. in Fight on Al-Qaeda (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/29/AR2007062902409.html)

Let me know if you have any more questions, spurster.

[Yonivore]

Now, it's my turn.

Why is the media, in this case the Associated Press, making up bad news and not reporting good news about the war in Iraq?

[Flight3107]

Now, it's my turn.

Why is the media, in this case the Associated Press, making up bad news and not reporting good news about the war in Iraq?



Because they are run by the far left, what did you expect them to do?

[Yonivore]

Because they are run by the far left, what did you expect them to do?
Okay, why is the left opposed to America winning the war against al Qaeda in Iraq? And, now, they're making noises about abandoning Afghanistan, the war they were for.

[George Gervin's Afro]

You're blithering...make sense, will you?


Ok I'll simplify it for you dummy..

curve ball and verifiable?..what do they have in common?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Okay, why is the left opposed to America winning the war against al Qaeda in Iraq? And, now, they're making noises about abandoning Afghanistan, the war they were for.


Now we're back to making opinon as fact again? WHo on the left Yoni?

[Yonivore]

Now we're back to making opinon as fact again? WHo on the left Yoni?
Apparently, everyone on the left.

From Pelosi on down to the biased media.

Why do Democratic congresspeople sound like Tokyo Rose? Why is the Associated Press making up stories about sectarian massacres?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Apparently, everyone on the left.

From Pelosi on down to the biased media.

Why do Democratic congresspeople sound like Tokyo Rose? Why is the Associated Press making up stories about sectarian massacres?

Maybe they got bad intel? You have already established that the President had to go war based on the intel he had at the time? Most of it came back to be dead wrong.. Isn't that what you have said? So I can assume to you it's ok for making justifications on bad intel for war..but not for a press story?.. Real consistent yoni.. you don't have double standards

[Yonivore]

London Mayor Ken Livingstone hearts Islamo-fascists. Oh yeah, he thinks everyone else is more violent than Muslims (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20070630/tuk-britain-attacks-mayor-saudi-muslims-a7ad41d.html).


"In this city, Muslims are more likely to be law-abiding than non-Muslims and less likely to support the use of violence to achieve political ends than non-Muslims," he told BBC Radio.

He's a lefty, right?

[Yonivore]

Maybe they got bad intel? You have already established that the President had to go war based on the intel he had at the time? Most of it came back to be dead wrong.. Isn't that what you have said? So I can assume to you it's ok for making justifications on bad intel for war..but not for a press story?.. Real consistent yoin..
You're still blithering.

Are you saying that Pelosi wants to surrender in Iraq and Afghanistan because she's getting bad intel? From where? Oh yeah, Murtha and the Associated Press.

Well, at least you admit that.

[George Gervin's Afro]

London Mayor Ken Livingstone hearts Islamo-fascists. Oh yeah, he thinks everyone else is more violent than Muslims (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20070630/tuk-britain-attacks-mayor-saudi-muslims-a7ad41d.html).



He's a lefty, right?


So his stating that that the majority of Muslims in the UK aren't terrorists is somehow inaccurate?

[George Gervin's Afro]

You're still blithering.

Are you saying that Pelosi wants to surrender in Iraq and Afghanistan because she's getting bad intel? From where? Oh yeah, Murtha and the Associated Press.

Well, at least you admit that.

No your saying Pelsio wants to surrender..
Well maybe you need to slow down and look at yor second post. The one where make the claim the left and the press don't want to win because a 'false' story was reported? I know I've caught you in yet another double standard that you carry around in your hip pocket. Does hte pres get the same pass the president did? bad informaton leads to bad decisions right?

[Yonivore]

So his stating that that the majority of Muslims in the UK aren't terrorists is somehow inaccurate?
Did you read the quote right?

He's said Muslims are more likely to be law-abiding than non-Muslims and less likely to support the use of violence to achieve political ends than non-Muslims.

He didn't say anything about the majority of Muslims not being terrorists.

But, on that, I've yet to see any "moderate" Muslims stand up and denounce the attempted terrorist bombings in London.

[Yonivore]

Well maybe you need to slow down and look at your original post. The one where make the claim the left and the press don't want to win because a 'false' story was reported? I know I've caught you in yet another double standard that you carry around in your hip pocket. Does hte pres get the same pass the president did? bad informaton leads to bad decisions right?
No, they don't get the same pass. The Press didn't have to respond to a terrorist attack on American soil and make a tough decision based on available intelligence in an effort to preserve national security.

They only have to report the news. The least they could do is make sure they're right before they start splashing it around.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Did you read the quote right?

He's said Muslims are more likely to be law-abiding than non-Muslims and less likely to support the use of violence to achieve political ends than non-Muslims.

He didn't say anything about the majority of Muslims not being terrorists.

But, on that, I've yet to see any "moderate" Muslims stand up and denounce the attempted terrorist bombings in London.


So what does this to do with him being on the left? I see your talent in taking statements out of context to fit our point is rearing it's disgusting head..

[Yonivore]

So what does this to do with him being on the left? I see your talent in taking statements out of context to fit our point is rearing it's disgusting head..
It fits the al Qaeda apologist mold, that's what it has to do with being on the left.

Okay, put his comment in context for me. Tell me how saying, Muslims are more likely than Non-Muslims to be violent and that Muslims are less likely than Non-Muslims to support the use of violence, can mean anything other than what I said, he believes Muslims are less violent than everyone else and less supportive of violence than everyone else.

I'll wait patiently for you to put this in context for me.

[George Gervin's Afro]

It fits the al Qaeda apologist mold, that's what it has to do with being on the left.

Okay, put his comment in context for me. Tell me how saying, Muslims are more likely than Non-Muslims to be violent and that Muslims are less likely than Non-Muslims to support the use of violence, can mean anything other than what I said, he believes Muslims are less violent than everyone else and less supportive of violence than everyone else.

I'll wait patiently for you to put this in context for me.

Yoni you take comments out of context all of the time..(see the coulter v edward thread) so I won't waste my time but I do want to mention something. I have become more familiar with your style of argument. What I find with your arguments is that they seem to change when it comes to whomever is involved. Take the latest example of how you hold the press to rigid and unbending standard of accuracy. Using the exact same logic when I replace the press with the president you change the logic. I have felt for a long time you were a hypocrite but I could never put my finger on it until recently. There are many other situations that you caveat your way through similar scenerios when it comes to dems and the right. I would have more respect for you if you were more consistent but I can't figure out if you are doing it consciously. I study the way people argue as oppsed to what they are saying.. if you look at this board you can identify patterns of the way people argue .. rather than go tit for tat with you on various threads I just like to point out your inconsistencies.. you don't even realize it.. but that's alright you assume that you are so much smarter than I am and I don 't mind that...

[Yonivore]

Yoni you take comments out of context all of the time..
So, please put the Livingstone comments in context


(see the coulter v edward thread)
That whole thread was about how people were taking Coulter's comments out of context. But, it wasn't me taking them out of context, I was putting them back in.


so I won't waste my time
Translation: I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about.


but I do want to mention something. I have become more familiar with your style of argument. What I find with your arguments is that they seem to change when it comes to whomever is involved. Take the latest example of how you hold the press to rigid and unbending standard of accuracy.
Who said rigid and unbending. Would it have been that hard to verify the decapitation murders of 20 people?


Using the exact same logic when I replace the press with the president you change the logic.
I suggest you see the other thread I started about the conflict within the CIA leading up to the war. The president had every reason to believe Saddam the intelligence he received supported his decision.

But, I understand that you can't defend the left, the press, the Muslims, or the idiots on this board. So, please, go ahead and deflect blame.


I have felt for a long time you were a hypocrite but I could never put my finger on it until recently. There are many other situations that you caveat your way through similar scenerios when it comes to dems and the right. I would have more respect for you if you were more consistent but I can't figure out if you are doing it consciously. I study the way people argue as oppsed to what they are saying.. if you look at this board you can identify patterns of the way people argue .. rather than go tit for tat with you on various threads I just like to point out your inconsistencies.. you don't even realize it.. but that's alright you assume that you are so much smarter than I am and I don 't mind that...
I'll try to survive the sharp criticism.

You've yet to answer any of the questions asked in this thread. Instead, you've tried to make this about me.

So, why do Pelosi and gang want to surrender in Iraq? And, why does the press make up negative stories about the war?

[George Gervin's Afro]

So, please put the Livingstone comments in context


That whole thread was about how people were taking Coulter's comments out of context. But, it wasn't me taking them out of context, I was putting them back in.


Translation: I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about.


Who said rigid and unbending. Would it have been that hard to verify the decapitation murders of 20 people?


I suggest you see the other thread I started about the conflict within the CIA leading up to the war. The president had every reason to believe Saddam the intelligence he received supported his decision.

But, I understand that you can't defend the left, the press, the Muslims, or the idiots on this board. So, please, go ahead and deflect blame.


I'll try to survive the sharp criticism.

You've yet to answer any of the questions asked in this thread. Instead, you've tried to make this about me.

So, why do Pelosi and gang want to surrender in Iraq? And, why does the press make up negative stories about the war?


Show me a quote for pelosi or any dem for that matter mentioning surrender. As far as the press goes they simply got bad information and they had to make the decision to run the story based on the information they had( sound familiar?)

[PixelPusher]

...let us start fighting the war on terror like it needs to be fought.

Start fighting it how? Should we invade/occupy more ME countries than we already have so far? Shoud we suspend more civil liberties? Are there anymore God Emperor powers left that the Executive Branch hasn't already claimed?

[clambake]

This problem will soon be solved. "W" was seen fishing off the coast of Kennebunkport. Every dipshit old fart needs a moment of reflection to clear their mind(some hot, dark haired vixen was with him, and I understand she came back with a red snapper) and pretend our sons and daughters aren't gathering pieces of their comrades bodies placing them into cadaver bags. It's not like he's flying over the Ketrina disaster on his way to a golf resort. Let's give him the benefit we already doubt.

[xrayzebra]

Yoni you take comments out of context all of the time..(see the coulter v edward thread) so I won't waste my time but I do want to mention something. I have become more familiar with your style of argument. What I find with your arguments is that they seem to change when it comes to whomever is involved. Take the latest example of how you hold the press to rigid and unbending standard of accuracy. Using the exact same logic when I replace the press with the president you change the logic. I have felt for a long time you were a hypocrite but I could never put my finger on it until recently. There are many other situations that you caveat your way through similar scenerios when it comes to dems and the right. I would have more respect for you if you were more consistent but I can't figure out if you are doing it consciously. I study the way people argue as oppsed to what they are saying.. if you look at this board you can identify patterns of the way people argue .. rather than go tit for tat with you on various threads I just like to point out your inconsistencies.. you don't even realize it.. but that's alright you assume that you are so much smarter than I am and I don 't mind that...

And why shouldn't the press be held to a high standard?
They report "after" the fact. Using your own argument,
about Bush, he had to make a "decision" based on
information supplied to him by his intelligent community,
which by the way, was the same intelligence your
dimm-o-craps were citing in their arguments about
Saddam having WMD. And Saddam did have WMD, he
used it many times, the question is: What did he do
with it?

Remember something. The press is suppose to report:
Who
What
When
Where

Not opinion, unless it is reporting someone else opinion.
If it is their own, then it belongs on the editorial page.

[Yonivore]

Show me a quote for pelosi or any dem for that matter mentioning surrender.
Lawmakers Reject Immediate Iraq Withdrawal (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8DVAQ6O3&show_article=1)
Guess who were the three votes in favor of the resolution.

Hell, I'll give 'em to you. Pelosi, Murtha, and Ron Paul.


Pelosi As far as the press goes they simply got bad information and they had to make the decision to run the story based on the information they had( sound familiar?)
When the press is faced with the responsibilities of a president, in the face of the aftermath of the most horrific attack on our country since Pearl Harbor, I'll cut them some slack.

But, after the Jamail Hussein debacle, earlier this year, you'd think they would have learned their lesson on relying on Iraqi stringers for information. I guess not. But, realistically, I don't think they really care if the information is reliable if it is bad news for the U. S.

This press is unashamedly becoming a tool for the enemy. So are you.

[Yonivore]

What happens when the press fails to report a story on which the source is not properly vetted?

That's right. Nothing.

What happens when the president fails to act on intelligence information, even if questionable or indefinite, that portends a repeat of a horrible day just months prior?

Now, what if it's Saddam Hussein's Iraq -- a regime already acting way outside international norm and committing atrocities on his own people while perverting the U.N. Oil For Food humanitarian aid and about to convince his friends in France, Germany, Russia, and the U.N. to help them get sanctions lifted?

That's right. You fuck 'em up.

[Yonivore]

How 'bout a preview of what al Qaeda had in store for Iraq had we not intervened.

Michael Yon (http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/bless-the-beasts-and-children.htm) reports from Iraq. "As we passed through the village, Captain Combs pointed out the nice houses, saying the people had been simple farmers with comfortable homes and lives. Until al Qaeda came." What follows is a photo essay of what happens, actually happens, when the "militants" gain power over a village and proceed to turn it into the holy 8th century, the Year Zero or whatever those with the most recent scheme to turn the world into a paradise on earth want to call it.


Later in the day, some of the soldiers from the unit I share a tent with, the C-52, told me that one of their Kit Carson scouts (comprised of some of our previous enemies who have turned on al Qaeda) had pointed out an al Qaeda who had cut off the heads of children. Soldiers from C-52 say that the Kit Carson scout freaked out and tried to hide when he spotted the man he identified as an al Qaeda operative. Just how (or if) the scout really knew the man had beheaded children was unknown to the soldiers of C-52, but they took the suspected Al Qaeda to the police, who knew the man. C-52 soldiers told me the Iraqi police were inflamed, and that one policeman in particular was crazed with intent to kill the man who they said had the blood of Iraqi children on his hands. According to the story told to me on 30 June, it took almost 45 minutes for the C-52 soldiers to calm down the policeman who had drawn his pistol to execute the al Qaeda man. That same policeman nearly lost his mind when an American soldier then gave the al Qaeda man a drink of cold water.
"Crazed with intent." Now there's a nice phrase, but one wonders. Who was crazy, the cop who wanted to shoot the al-Qaeda child beheading specialist; was it the "militant" himself? Was it the C-52 troopers who instinctively offered the prisoner the automatic courtesies of civilization or the whole damn world?

One thing's for sure. Digital cameras take better pictures of massacre victims being exhumed from shallow graves than those old black and white Speed Graphics ever did. Color conveys more information. But whether the information ever gets conveyed depends on how willing one is to admit that those pictures could one day be of your family or of you. When it finally comes home the game is being played, not for media points, but for keeps.

And this is the nature of the enemy in Iraq.

Michael Ledeen comments (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NGVjMGJlM2JlYzZhM2ZmM2NiNWUwYjE3MzViYjM5YTg=) further:


Yon's latest provides a clear picture of the terrorists' savage methods. Literally, because it's mostly photographs of what happened to a village that fell into the claws of al Qaeda. They just tore apart the villagers, their livestock, their children and women, and then boobytrapped the area to try to kill our guys, knowing that they would honor the dead.

And then I think about the terrorists' latest efforts in England and Scotland, where only innocents were targeted. And of course 9/11. And then I think of so many of our leaders, who seem to be preparing to retreat from Iraq (and therefore Afghanistan), thereby leaving the beasts, as Michael Yon properly calls them, an even broader area of operation.

And then I return to my mantra: the war is much bigger than iraq, we cannot win it in iraq alone, and there is no escape from this war. They are already here, and "bringing the boys home" will gain us nothing. It will only increase the number of victims.

Warning: some of the photos are rather graphic. Polls suggest that most Americans would rather abandon the field to this enemy than defeat it. I find that, frankly, incomprehensible.

[PixelPusher]

http://www.investors.com/editorial/cartoons/IMAGES/cartoons/toon070207.gif

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a394/jamackey/revised.gif

[PixelPusher]

How 'bout a preview of what al Qaeda had in store for Iraq had we not intervened.
Really? Was Saddam going to gut his own security forces, and allow Iraq to fall into anarchy? Those are the conditions that allowed al Qeada in Iraq to flourish.



And this is the nature of the enemy in Iraq.

Warning: some of the photos are rather graphic. Polls suggest that most Americans would rather abandon the field to this enemy than defeat it. I find that, frankly, incomprehensible.
So we are obligated to commit U.S. forces wherever human atrocities occur? When are we deploying to Darfur then?

[Duff McCartney]

So we are obligated to commit U.S. forces wherever human atrocities occur? When are we deploying to Darfur then?

Took the words right out of my mouth.

[Yonivore]

Took the words right out of my mouth.
Y'all have the Clintonian knack for compartmentalizing issues.

But that the humanitarian crisis in Iraq were the only issue you'd have a point in your tiny little brains.

[Yonivore]

Yet another facet of the war on terrorism.

TOP LEBANESE HEZBOLLAH BOMB-MAKER CAPTURED IN IRAQ (http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/01/you-dont-say-us-captures-top-hezbollah-bombmaker-in-iraq/)

He then proceeds to confess he was sent by Iranian Quds Forces -- establishing a direct link to Iran -- and that he played a "crucial role" in the execution of 5 U. S. Soldiers in January.

Can the inevitable be avoided any longer?

I think Presidents have a lot of control over making crises into non-crises -- they just don't talk about them. They pretend they're not happening. They patrol carefully for leaks to keep the public from finding out there are serious threats to America ... which they'd rather not deal with right now, but were the public appraised of them, they might be forced to.

The Bush Administration hasn't exactly frozen news about Iran's complicity in Iraq out of the press -- officials have indeed mentioned it from time to time -- but they've really not strongly pushed the stories, either.

This could be prudence on their part: After all, they can't be perceived as being too eager to begin another war in the Muslim world lest the Pelosi's and George Gervin's Afros of the world do all they can to disabuse everyone of such a view.

But this latest event may take that crisis-control-by-keeping-quiet tool out of Bush's toolbox. And, perhaps he thinks he finally has the predicate he needs to take action. CNN didn't just get this story out of dogged investigation, after all.

Of course, some will "question the timing," a recurring theme on all things that tend to support the U. S. actions against global terrorism, but, there's also this:

Afghan officials admit Iran is arming the Taliban to the teeth. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070701/wl_mideast_afp/afghanistanunrestiranuspolitics_070701045517)

This seems like a Case for War being made.

If not "war" in the sense of full-blown invasion -- which I think is politically and, likely militarily, impossible -- then definitely a full naval blockade and likely airstrikes.

No rebuilding. No Colin Powell "You break it, you bought it." Bullshit. We're breaking it because it's killing our soldiers. They can do the rebuilding themselves; it may not be the Iranian people's fault their government is killing us, but it sure the hell ain't our fault either, and we're not required to commit to pacifying and rebuilding the country simply because we act out of self-defense against an enemy making incessant war on us.

A case could be made that the organic rebuilding of the country -- by Iranians themselves -- will be bloody and difficult, but likely less bloody and difficult than with the hated American Infidel attempting to bring peace.

Destroy the state. Reduce it to chaos. It is a ticking time bomb, and it's time for a controlled demolition. "Render it safe."

Let's Roll!

[George Gervin's Afro]

Yet another facet of the war on terrorism.

TOP LEBANESE HEZBOLLAH BOMB-MAKER CAPTURED IN IRAQ (http://hotair.com/archives/2007/07/01/you-dont-say-us-captures-top-hezbollah-bombmaker-in-iraq/)

He then proceeds to confess he was sent by Iranian Quds Forces -- establishing a direct link to Iran -- and that he played a "crucial role" in the execution of 5 U. S. Soldiers in January.

Can the inevitable be avoided any longer?

I think Presidents have a lot of control over making crises into non-crises -- they just don't talk about them. They pretend they're not happening. They patrol carefully for leaks to keep the public from finding out there are serious threats to America ... which they'd rather not deal with right now, but were the public appraised of them, they might be forced to.

The Bush Administration hasn't exactly frozen news about Iran's complicity in Iraq out of the press -- officials have indeed mentioned it from time to time -- but they've really not strongly pushed the stories, either.

This could be prudence on their part: After all, they can't be perceived as being too eager to begin another war in the Muslim world lest the Pelosi's and George Gervin's Afros of the world do all they can to disabuse everyone of such a view.

But this latest event may take that crisis-control-by-keeping-quiet tool out of Bush's toolbox. And, perhaps he thinks he finally has the predicate he needs to take action. CNN didn't just get this story out of dogged investigation, after all.

Of course, some will "question the timing," a recurring theme on all things that tend to support the U. S. actions against global terrorism, but, there's also this:

Afghan officials admit Iran is arming the Taliban to the teeth. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070701/wl_mideast_afp/afghanistanunrestiranuspolitics_070701045517)

This seems like a Case for War being made.

If not "war" in the sense of full-blown invasion -- which I think is politically and, likely militarily, impossible -- then definitely a full naval blockade and likely airstrikes.

No rebuilding. No Colin Powell "You break it, you bought it." Bullshit. We're breaking it because it's killing our soldiers. They can do the rebuilding themselves; it may not be the Iranian people's fault their government is killing us, but it sure the hell ain't our fault either, and we're not required to commit to pacifying and rebuilding the country simply because we act out of self-defense against an enemy making incessant war on us.

A case could be made that the organic rebuilding of the country -- by Iranians themselves -- will be bloody and difficult, but likely less bloody and difficult than with the hated American Infidel attempting to bring peace.

Destroy the state. Reduce it to chaos. It is a ticking time bomb, and it's time for a controlled demolition. "Render it safe."

Let's Roll!



This could be prudence on their part: After all, they can't be perceived as being too eager to begin another war in the Muslim world lest the Pelosi's and George Gervin's Afros of the world do all they can to disabuse everyone of such a view.

Well they have done such a masterul job in winning the peace in post war Iraq so why would anyone question this administration in starting another war? Yoni trusts the govt (only in the case of fighting terrorism and not securing the border etc.) so what the hell war is fun!!

[Yonivore]

Well they have done such a masterul job in winning the peace in post war Iraq so why would anyone question this administration in starting another war? Yoni trusts the govt (only in the case of fighting terrorism and not securing the border etc.) so what the hell war is fun!!
So, let's hear your solution for Iran.

[George Gervin's Afro]

So, let's hear your solution for Iran.


Well considering it seems to to be well known that upwards of 70% of the Iranian population is pro-USA. The majorty of young people in Iran want to enhance a more pro-western attitude when it comes to the USA and the rest of the world. Your solutiion of bombing them back into the stone age doesn't seem to be the brightest idea taking into account the affection of the Iranian youth towards our country..

[Yonivore]

Well considering it seems to to be well known that upwards of 70% of the Iranian population is pro-USA. The majorty of young people in Iran want to ehance a more pro-western stance when it comes to the USA and the rest of the world. Your solutiion of bombing them back into the stone age doesn't seem to be the brightest idea taking into account the affection of the Iranian youth towards our country..
Well, that upwards of 70% had better get off their asses and reign in an out of control regime. Time is running short.

I think it's funny you have yet to even acknowledge that it may be precisely because of Iranian support of al Qaeda and other insurgent groups, in Iraq, that we've had such trouble to begin with.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Well, that upwards of 70% had better get off their asses and reign in an out of control regime. Time is running short.

I think it's funny you have yet to even acknowledge that it may be precisely because of Iranian support of al Qaeda and other insurgent groups, in Iraq, that we've had such trouble to begin with.


Well if Iran was the biggest bad guy in that region then WHY IN THE HELL DID WE INVADE IRAQ?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Well, that upwards of 70% had better get off their asses and reign in an out of control regime. Time is running short.

I think it's funny you have yet to even acknowledge that it may be precisely because of Iranian support of al Qaeda and other insurgent groups, in Iraq, that we've had such trouble to begin with.


What I find hilarious is that you fail to acknowledge that Iran is in Iraq because we are there. Iran was held in check by the guy we overthrew. So now we have destablized the region and you still blame everyone else but the guys who started this fiasco..

[Yonivore]

Well if Iran was the biggest bad guy in that region then WHY IN THE HELL DID WE INVADE IRAQ?
Again, I refer you to the AUMF in Iraq.

But, speculating, it could also be that Afghanistan and Iraq both share a border with Iran and, it will be easier to deal with Iran with established footholds in those two countries.

Call me crazy, but it may be a military strategy.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Again, I refer you to the AUMF in Iraq.

But, speculating, it could also be that Afghanistan and Iraq both share a border with Iran and, it will be easier to deal with Iran with established footholds in those two countries.

Call me crazy, but it may be a military strategy.


Call me crazy but it ain't working...the iraq liberation exp or containing Iran but hey it's military stategy

[Yonivore]

What I find hilarious is that you fail to acknowledge that Iran is in Iraq because we are there.
Yeah, and they'd be anywhere we were militarily, that's the problem.


Iran was held in check by the guy we overthrew. So now we have destablized the region and you still blame everyone else but the guys who started this fiasco..
Well, that's productive reasoning related to current events. But, as for history, I think you can blame Jimmy Carter for that fiasco.

[Yonivore]

Call me crazy but it ain't working...the iraq liberation exp or containing Iran but hey it's military stategy
It's not working the way you'd like it to but, it's not over.

Maybe if the left would quit parroting the message of the enemy (or vice versa -- I really don't know who began the defeatist harping first), we could work together in defeating them in Iraq, Afghanistan, and then, Iran.

[Yonivore]

The British are Pissed Off! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLzN7IxdhrA)

[George Gervin's Afro]

The British are Pissed Off! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLzN7IxdhrA)


I think that's a great idea Yoni. You should go out and burn the koran on camera!! Go for it!!..be sure to leave your name and address for anyone to contact you.

[PixelPusher]

It's not working the way you'd like it to but, it's not over.

Maybe if the left would quit parroting the message of the enemy (or vice versa -- I really don't know who began the defeatist harping first), we could work together in defeating them in Iraq, Afghanistan, and then, Iran.
Such is the magical thinking of the warmongers...If only everyone would here would wave their little american flags harder and say only nice things about the Bush Administration, all our problems will go away!

[George Gervin's Afro]

Such is the magical thinking of the warmongers...If only everyone would here would wave their little american flags harder and say only nice things about the Bush Administration, all our problems will go away!


Pix your right. I am going to run out right now and throw a couple more support the troop ribbons on my car.. I will just shut and be a good follower from here on out..

[PixelPusher]

Y'all have the Clintonian knack for compartmentalizing issues.

But that the humanitarian crisis in Iraq were the only issue you'd have a point in your tiny little brains.
But that didn't stop you from waxing self-righteous about our "humanitarian" obligation to stay in Iraq forever and ever, amen. Compartmentalization, indeed.

[Yonivore]

I think that's a great idea Yoni. You should go out and burn the koran on camera!! Go for it!!..be sure to leave your name and address for anyone to contact you.
You're funny. But, it certainly puts the lie to the meme that they're mad over anything substantial.

Knightings, cartoons, books...they're such a cerebral bunch, aren't they?

[PixelPusher]

You're funny. But, it certainly puts the lie to the meme that they're mad over anything substantial.

Knightings, cartoons, books...they're such a cerebral bunch, aren't they?
"They" as in religious extremists or "They" as in all Muslims in general?

[Yonivore]

Pix your right. I am going to run out right now and throw a couple more support the troop ribbons on my car.. I will just shut and be a good follower from here on out..
You obviously don't believe the lession of Vietnam.

But for the American Anti-War movement, the North Vietnam would have thrown in the towel long before our withdrawal. But, they hoped -- and were right -- the American protests would cause the U.S. to withdraw from Vietnam before the U.S. was able to defeat them militarily.

It is a shame you discount the effects of rabid anti-war rhetoric on morale and on policy. It emboldens and supports the enemy and, in the case of Vietnam, it forced an administration to give up and abandon Southeast Asia to the killing fields.

The North Vietnamese had not won a single military victory in the war and neither have al Qaeda or the insurgents in Iraq. Yet, with nonsense like you and Murtha and the rest of the idiots spouting, they may not have to in order to for the United States to be defeated, once again, in a war they can't lose militarily.

If our enemies saw a united front at home, they wouldn't stand a chance over there. Why do you think Zawahiri and bin Laden parrot the words of Anti-war Americans? Why do they want Democrats to win elections or praise us when we vote into office anti-war candidates?

[xrayzebra]

You obviously don't believe the lession of Vietnam.

But for the American Anti-War movement, the North Vietnam would have thrown in the towel long before our withdrawal. But, they hoped -- and were right -- the American protests would cause the U.S. to withdraw from Vietnam before the U.S. was able to defeat them militarily.

It is a shame you discount the effects of rabid anti-war rhetoric on morale and on policy. It emboldens and supports the enemy and, in the case of Vietnam, it forced an administration to give up and abandon Southeast Asia to the killing fields.

The North Vietnamese had not won a single military victory in the war and neither have al Qaeda or the insurgents in Iraq. Yet, with nonsense like you and Murtha and the rest of the idiots spouting, they may not have to in order to for the United States to be defeated, once again, in a war they can't lose militarily.

If our enemies saw a united front at home, they wouldn't stand a chance over there. Why do you think Zawahiri and bin Laden parrot the words of Anti-war Americans? Why do they want Democrats to win elections or praise us when we vote into office anti-war candidates?

Yoni, you can argue with GGA, because he is just another
Jane Fonda in drag.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Yoni, you can argue with GGA, because he is just another
Jane Fonda in drag.

Trust me ray I'm more of a patriotic american than your kool aid drinking ass.

[George Gervin's Afro]

You obviously don't believe the lession of Vietnam.

But for the American Anti-War movement, the North Vietnam would have thrown in the towel long before our withdrawal. But, they hoped -- and were right -- the American protests would cause the U.S. to withdraw from Vietnam before the U.S. was able to defeat them militarily.

It is a shame you discount the effects of rabid anti-war rhetoric on morale and on policy. It emboldens and supports the enemy and, in the case of Vietnam, it forced an administration to give up and abandon Southeast Asia to the killing fields.

The North Vietnamese had not won a single military victory in the war and neither have al Qaeda or the insurgents in Iraq. Yet, with nonsense like you and Murtha and the rest of the idiots spouting, they may not have to in order to for the United States to be defeated, once again, in a war they can't lose militarily.

If our enemies saw a united front at home, they wouldn't stand a chance over there. Why do you think Zawahiri and bin Laden parrot the words of Anti-war Americans? Why do they want Democrats to win elections or praise us when we vote into office anti-war candidates?


What lesson? The 'Gulf of Tonkin' lesson? WMDs for Iraq?? Somehow you take the notion that the foundation of our country relies on the ability of our citizens to protest and voice displeaure of our government as a convenience. We have already won the war Yoni that was the easy part yet somehow since bush broke Iraq I am supposed to just shut up and hope the idiot in command can find a noble way out of it. Sorry dude getting people like me to shut up won't help. In fact if bush would have listened to people like me we wouldn't have destablilized the middle east. Bush has fucked up all along the way yet you still want me to be quiet. Go to hell

[xrayzebra]

Trust me ray I'm more of a patriotic american than your kool aid drinking ass.

Sure you are.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Sure you are.

I sleep well ray.

[Yonivore]

Yoni, you can argue with GGA, because he is just another
Jane Fonda in drag.
What GGA doesn't realize is that I'm not really speaking to him at all. I have absolutely no illusions about ever changing his mind on this or any other issue.

These threads get more views than posts.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Hey ray you told me more than once that we fight them in Iraq so we don't have to fight them over here..so what's all of this terrorism going about? please explain to me again how we fight 'them' (whomever they are) over there and not over here? doesn't seem to be working does it? Oh sorry I just need to shut up and play a good patriotic American..

[George Gervin's Afro]

What GGA doesn't realize is that I'm not really speaking to him at all. I have absolutely no illusions about ever changing his mind on this or any other issue.

These threads get more views than posts.


You are a hypocrite but your kind is slowly being faded to the far out fringe which is good for the country..

[Yonivore]

What lesson? The 'Gulf of Tonkin' lesson? WMDs for Iraq??
If either the "Gulf of Tonkin" incident or "WMDs in Iraq" were the only justifications given for entering into either conflict your pea brain might have a point but, they weren't...so, you don't. And anyway, you're hyperventilating about justification and not addressing prosecution. The fact remains, we entered into both conflicts whether you like the justification for doing so, or not.

Now, we're faced with a repeat of having the anti-War left seriously disrupt our prosecution of yet another war to the benefit and delight of the enemy. Maybe you should have been more persuasive during the election and had John Kerry as President but, you didn't...however, I doubt very seriously he would have done what you want either, to pull out of Iraq.

If the Democrats were truly serious about pulling out of Iraq, they'd be sponsoring bill after bill after bill trying to force the president to withdraw. But, after the first one gets shot down in flames 403-3, they realize no one really wants to pull out, they just want to bash the president over his Iraq policy for political points.

Unfortunately, it emboldens the enemy...just like the anti-war rhetoric during Vietnam.


Somehow you take the notion that the foundation of our country relies on the ability of our citizens to protest and voice displeaure of our government as a convenience. We have already won the war Yoni that was the easy part yet somehow since bush broke Iraq I am supposed to just shut up and hope the idiot in command can find a noble way out of it. Sorry dude getting people like me to shut up won't help. In fact if bush would have listened to people like me we wouldn't have destablilized the middle east. Bush has fucked up all along the way yet you still want me to be quiet. Go to hell
Back to blithering...you barely make sense when you have no defense.

And hell's going to be too crowded with you and your jihadi friends for me to go there. I'm on the right side of this argument. And, frankly, I don't care how you sleep at night. The definition of irony would be for you to be exiting a movie theater when some Iraqi-Afghani-Iranian-made jihadi detonates himself next to you or a loved one...particularly one that was released from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

For your sake, you'd better hope those you hate and work so hard to undermine can stop them.

[Yonivore]

Hey ray you told me more than once that we fight them in Iraq so we don't have to fight them over here..so what's all of this terrorism going about? please explain to me again how we fight 'them' (whomever they are) over there and not over here? doesn't seem to be working does it? Oh sorry I just need to shut up and play a good patriotic American..
Well, with the ineptness of most of their attempts, it's apparent they're the second string. I wonder where the starting team is? Oh yeah, rotting or hiding or in prison.

[Yonivore]

You are a hypocrite but your kind is slowly being faded to the far out fringe which is good for the country..
I proudly share the sentiment of the vast majority of a serving military. And, as such, I wear your idiotic criticism as a badge of honor.

You don't even know what hypocrisy is.

[George Gervin's Afro]

If either the "Gulf of Tonkin" incident or "WMDs in Iraq" were the only justifications given for entering into either conflict your pea brain might have a point but, they weren't...so, you don't. And anyway, you're hyperventilating about justification and not addressing prosecution. The fact remains, we entered into both conflicts whether you like the justification for doing so, or not.

Now, we're faced with a repeat of having the anti-War left seriously disrupt our prosecution of yet another war to the benefit and delight of the enemy. Maybe you should have been more persuasive during the election and had John Kerry as President but, you didn't...however, I doubt very seriously he would have done what you want either, to pull out of Iraq.

If the Democrats were truly serious about pulling out of Iraq, they'd be sponsoring bill after bill after bill trying to force the president to withdraw. But, after the first one gets shot down in flames 403-3, they realize no one really wants to pull out, they just want to bash the president over his Iraq policy for political points.

Unfortunately, it emboldens the enemy...just like the anti-war rhetoric during Vietnam.


Back to blithering...you barely make sense when you have no defense.

And hell's going to be too crowded with you and your jihadi friends for me to go there. I'm on the right side of this argument. And, frankly, I don't care how you sleep at night. The definition of irony would be for you to be exiting a movie theater when some Iraqi-Afghani-Iranian-made jihadi detonates himself next to you or a loved one...particularly one that was released from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

For your sake, you'd better hope those you hate and work so hard to undermine can stop them.


No defense? I'm not the one who needs to steal other people's words and masquerade them as mine.. plagerism is not a defense..

[George Gervin's Afro]

Well, with the ineptness of most of their attempts, it's apparent they're the second string. I wonder where the starting team is? Oh yeah, rotting or hiding or in prison.
+

Or your just guessing..

[George Gervin's Afro]

I proudly share the sentiment of the vast majority of a serving military. And, as such, I wear your idiotic criticism as a badge of honor.

You don't even know what hypocrisy is.


What I don't understand is why you just don't go to Iraq and show the insurgents that compassionate conservatism is the way to go Yoni.. by all means I'm sure we could get a collection to get you a one way ticket to Iraq.. put your money where your mouth is.. I enjoyed your post about Brits now burning the Koran.. you seem to take pleasure out of that ..yet you don't have the balls to do it yourself.. why? because you are a pussy

[Yonivore]

What I don't understand is why you just don't go to Iraq and show the insurgents that compassionate conservatism is the way to go Yoni..
How do you know I haven't been?


by all means I'm sure we could get a collection to get you a one way ticket to Iraq..
Go ahead...that's something I'd like to see.


put your money where your mouth is..
I thought you were going to put your money where my mouth is.


I enjoyed your post about Brits now burning the Koran.. you seem to take pleasure out of that..
I merely pointed out they were pissed off. Given the propensity of Muslims to use the slightest provocation (cartoons and Salman Rushdie's knighting) to start violence, I thought it was an indication of how, maybe, some brits had reached the end of their ropes. I don't recall my post stating pleasure, or for that matter, any emotion.


yet you don't have the balls to do it yourself.. why? because you are a pussy
Ridicule. The refuge of losers. Nice.

Can't argue with facts, ridicule the the other side of the debate.

[George Gervin's Afro]

How do you know I haven't been?


Go ahead...that's something I'd like to see.


I thought you were going to put your money where my mouth is.


I merely pointed out they were pissed off. Given the propensity of Muslims to use the slightest provocation (cartoons and Salman Rushdie's knighting) to start violence, I thought it was an indication of how, maybe, some brits had reached the end of their ropes. I don't recall my post stating pleasure, or for that matter, any emotion.


Ridicule. The refuge of losers. Nice.

Can't argue with facts, ridicule the the other side of the debate.


:dramaquee
Maybe I'll go find a blog and use it as my own...

[PixelPusher]

How do you know I haven't been?

Oh, you're so coy...put your nuts on the table and let us know if you've served in Iraq. What's the matter? Is public service for your country a private affair?

[Yonivore]

:dramaquee
Maybe I'll go find a blog and use it as my own...
It would probably serve you better than your own brain.

[George Gervin's Afro]

It would probably serve you better than your own brain.


I prefer my own thoughts than someone else's but hey that's just me.

[Yonivore]

I prefer my own thoughts than someone else's but hey that's just me.
And you think that's working out for you, do you?

So, you've been to Iraq? You've witnessed the things upon which you expound daily? You're inside the CIA, the White House, the Congress? The New York Times? You talked the Ahmadenijad? You were there when Hamdi was plucked off the battlefield? You're in all these places and witnessing all these things?

Because, if you rely soley on your own thoughts, don't you think they'd better be informed thoughts? Do you just make shit up? I mean, if you rely on your own thoughts and you're not an insider on all the things you hold an opinion about, you're just making shit up. Right?

But if, like the rest of us, you form opinions based on information gleened from sources you trust -- that, hopefully, have access to sources in the know, then the debate isn't so much about putting your own thoughts down here in this forum but about whether or not you want to take the time to completely re-write an opinion with which you already agree.

No?

To me, this forum is about arguing ideas and not about whether or not I want to take the time to read analysis, agree with it and, then, re-write it so I can claim ownership.

If you want to now whose words I'm plagiaring, google a sentence, it'll usually turn up. I've not denied the practice. I choose to post it as an original writing -- as opposed to linking and quoting (although I do link sources of factual information and news sources upon which the opinion is based) -- because of the Nbadan factor.

He's cut and pased and linked so many damn articles, nobody really pays attention anymore. I think the ideas expressed in the subject matter I post is germane to the argument.

So sue me. You're still an idiot.

[George Gervin's Afro]

And you think that's working out for you, do you?

So, you've been to Iraq? You've witnessed the things upon which you expound daily? You're inside the CIA, the White House, the Congress? The New York Times? You talked the Ahmadenijad? You were there when Hamdi was plucked off the battlefield? You're in all these places and witnessing all these things?

Because, if you rely soley on your own thoughts, don't you think they'd better be informed thoughts? Do you just make shit up? I mean, if you rely on your own thoughts and you're not an insider on all the things you hold an opinion about, you're just making shit up. Right?

But if, like the rest of us, you form opinions based on information gleened from sources you trust -- that, hopefully, have access to sources in the know, then the debate isn't so much about putting your own thoughts down here in this forum but about whether or not you want to take the time to completely re-write an opinion with which you already agree.

No?

To me, this forum is about arguing ideas and not about whether or not I want to take the time to read analysis, agree with it and, then, re-write it so I can claim ownership.

If you want to now whose words I'm plagiaring, google a sentence, it'll usually turn up. I've not denied the practice. I choose to post it as an original writing -- as opposed to linking and quoting (although I do link sources of factual information and news sources upon which the opinion is based) -- because of the Nbadan factor.

He's cut and pased and linked so many damn articles, nobody really pays attention anymore. I think the ideas expressed in the subject matter I post is germane to the argument.

So sue me. You're still an idiot.


I may be an idiot but at least I'm honest.

[Yonivore]

I may be an idiot but at least I'm honest.
D'okie dokie.