No of course not the ones over here...who suck...I am talking about the ones in the Mid-East. Takes balls to be a lib in the mid-east...
http://www.nypost.com/seven/04012007...eri.htm?page=0
BETRAYED
HOW MIDEAST PROGRESSIVES FEEL ABOUT THEIR WESTERN 'COMRADES' Red flags high: Celebrating Saddam's capture outside Baghdad's Communist Party headquarters in 2003. April 1, 2007 -- WHILE elements of the Left in the United States and Europe are calling on Western democracies to abandon Afghanistan and Iraq to the Taliban and al Qaeda and surrender to the Khomeinists in Iran, new alliances are emerging against the jihadists in the region.
In much of the Middle East, most notably Afghanistan and Iraq, the Left is part of these new alliances.
* In Iraq, two rival Communist parties, along with Social Democrats and other center-left groups, supported the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and continue to play a significant role in the new pluralist system. They are resolutely opposed to a premature withdrawal of American and allied forces, as demanded by the U.S. Congress.
* In Lebanon, Walid Jumblatt's Progressive Socialist Party is at the heart of the democratic movement to against the Islamic Republic's attempt to dominate the country through its Hezbollah surrogates. The Lebanese democratic movement includes other parties of the Left, notably the Socialist Salvation Movement (Inqadh) and the Movement of the Democratic Left.
* In Iran, virtually the whole of the Left rejects President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's anti-Americanism and calls for normalization of ties with the United States. The recently created independent trade-union movement is emerging as a vocal challenger to Khomeinism.
PERHAPS the most interest ing new anti-jihadist alli ance, however, is taking shape in Afghanistan. After months of discussions the leaders of several parties that had fought each other for two decades have come together to set up a new alliance called Popular Front (Jibheh Melli).
One major figure in the group is Burhaneddin Rabbani - an Islamic scholar who served as Afghanistan's president after the Communist regime's collapse in 1992. As founder and leader of Jami'at Islami (Islamic Society), Rabbani was one of the first Afghan leaders who started the resistance movement against Soviet occupation. Yet Rabbani has agreed to enter the Popular Front along with leaders of Afghanistan's dissolved Communist Party.
Both rival wings of the Communist Party will be present in the new front. One wing, known as Parcham (The Banner) had always been pro-Soviet; the other, known as Shoeleh-Javid (Eternal Flame), had Maoist sentiments.
The new front will also include center-left figures such as Nuralhaq Olumi and Muhammad Gulabzvi, along with anti-Soviet mujahedin commanders such as Gen. Muhammad Qassim Fahim, a former defense minister.
BEFORE the U.S.-led inter ventions in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001 and 2003, much of the Middle Eastern Left shared the views of its U.S. and European counterparts with regard to America.
"We looked to the Left in the West and imitated it," says Awad Nasir, one of Iraq's best-known poets and a life-long Communist. "We heard from the United States and Western Europe that being Left meant being anti-American. So we were anti-American. And then we saw Americans coming from the other side of the world to save us from Saddam Hussein - something that our leftist friends and the Soviet Union would never contemplate."
Mustafa Kazemi, spokesman for the new Afghan front, expresses similar sentiments. "Our nation is still facing the menace of obscurantism and terror from Taliban and al Qaeda," he says. "Thus, we are surprised when elements of the Left in the United States and Europe campaign for withdrawal so that our new democracy is left defenseless against its enemies."
IRAQ'S parties of the Left were shocked when the new So cialist government in Spain decided to withdraw from the U.S.-led coalition in 2004. "We had hoped that with a party of the Left in power in Madrid we would get more support against the Islamofascists, not a withdrawal," says Aziz al-Haj, the veteran Iraqi communist leader.
Tareq al-Hashemi, vice president of Iraq, has also gambled his impeccable progressive record on the success of the pluralist experiment in his country. "Our enemy is al Qaeda, not the United States," he says.
Jumblatt, the Lebanese leader, says he realized that his life-long anti-Americanism had been misplaced when he saw "long lines of people, waiting to vote in Iraq, in the first free election in an Arab country."
Samir Qassir, a Lebanese center-left leader murdered by the Syrians, often spoke of anti-Americanism as "the last refuge of the scoundrel" in the Middle East. "Politics is always a question of choice," Qassir said in one of his last articles. "Here in the Middle East, we face a choice between democracy and alliance with the United States on one hand and surrender to religious fanatics and terrorists on the other."
SKIMMING through the Mid dle Eastern press these days can produce unexpected results. It's not rare to see a virulently anti-American article by an American or Western European leftist - and, alongside it on the same page, a pro-American article from an Arab, Iranian or Afghan progressive figure.
In Iran, for example, Hussein Shariatmadari - the ultra-Islamist editor of the daily newspaper Kayhan and a theoretician of the extreme right - often admiringly cites such American leftist figures as Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore and Jane Fonda.
Having all but abandoned its traditional opposition to capitalism and the bourgeois democratic system, much of the Western Left is forced to cling to anti-Americanism as its backbone.
To be sure, anti-Americanism is not the ailment of the Western Left alone. Extreme-right parties are also vehemently anti-American. Jean-Marie Le Pen, leader of the French neofascist National Front, is as opposed to the new democratic Iraq as Spain's Socialist Premier Jose Luis Zapatero.
In the Middle East, however, a good part of the Left, while not especially enamored of the United States, sees it as an ally against Islamist and totalitarian pan-Arab movements.
"Anti-Americanism is a luxury we cannot afford in the Middle East," says Adnan Hussein, a leftist Iraq writer recently picked by the Financial Times as one of the 50 most influential columnists in the world. "Blinded by anti-Americanism, the Left in the West ends up on the same side as religious fascists and despots."
Parviz Khosravi, a veteran of Iran's Communist movement, cites history as justification for the Left's rejection of "banal anti-Americanism."
"During the Second World War, all movements of the Left supported an alliance with the Western democracies led by the United States because the common enemy was Fascism," he says. "Today, we are in a similar position. Progressive forces in the Middle East are threatened by an Islamist version of Fascism. An alliance with Western democracies is not only desirable but necessary."
PRESIDENT Bush, the bete noire of liberals and leftists in the West, might be surprised to learn that he has a better image among liberals, leftists, secularists and even moderate Islamists in the Middle East.
While Chomsky and Moore see the United States as "an evil power," many leftists in the Middle East see it as a force for good that ended the tyranny of the Taliban in Afghanistan, dismantled the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and forced the Syrians out of Lebanon after 30 years of occupation.
"In our region, the United States has become a force for the good," says Jumblatt, who recently met President Bush at the White House for a surprise meeting.
Iranian-born journalist Amir Taheri is based in Europe.
LMAO.
It's going to be Mossadeq all over again.
Is it any wonder why the Mid-East is ed up after Islam, Communism...some more Islam, and some about to be more communism?
Poor bas s.
Still commies aren't as bad as terrorists...they're close, but since they don't espouse suicide bombing, nuclear holocaust, and beheading, I like them better.
LMFAO...well at least one thing is consistent on both sides of the globe.We heard from the United States and Western Europe that being Left meant being anti-American.
So we were anti-American. And then we saw Americans coming from the other side of the world to save us from Saddam Hussein - something that our leftist friends and the Soviet Union would never contemplate."
PWNT!!!
And don't say they don't have you tools pegged to a freaking T. You are anti-American, you do think America is to blame...you are against any thing to help remove those regimes and help their libs out...
WHat I been saying all along....you want peace to be a viable alternative?
You have to stick the pain in the ass liberal bullet in the Ayatollah's ass too....until their libs are tying one hand behind their back like ours do us, we need to use our technological edge and gets those bag Theocrats out of there.
Yes we'll then have commie problems and all their lefties will be as anti-American as ours are...but hey, one thing at a time, reducing the likleyhood of a suicide bomb nuke is the top priority.
Last edited by whottt; 04-03-2007 at 03:15 AM.
dubya and head have wasted more US lives and bodies than the terrorists
dubya and head greatly increased threats and risks to the USA
But, trying to distract from the real problems and causes, still whott the 's knee jerks on, pushing its own buttons of communism and socialism and liberals.
And of course, Whott loves for other Americans to waste their lives in fake wars while he and his war-mongers, too chicken to be war-fighters, safely conduct their war of words.
Boutons most rationale thinking people know Bush has made us less safe than before 9/11. Whott and all of the other apologists are still trying to justify the unnecessary war..
maybe we shouldve just given those ME liberals some guns and ammo, helped them overthrow saddam, and then embargo them when they come to power as communists.
weak post whottt
maybe we shouldve just given those ME liberals some guns and ammo, helped them overthrow saddam, and then embargo them when they come to power as communists.
weak post whottt
SO are you trying to say you're a Rumsfield fan? We already know you're a Saddam Fan.
Hey...you know what would go great with that Saddam Photo? One of Pelosi and King Fahd...
Why? Prove it.
Link...Evidence.
Whott and all of the other apologists are still trying to justify the unnecessary war..
How else we going to get Democracy rolling in the middle east?
Fool.
It's the regimes in power in the middle east that cause ing terrorism. How hard is this to see.
Idiot...
Are the British Islamic terrorists? No...see? Proof America doesn't cause it. Clown.
Anyone with a slightest grasp of history knows that the mindset that threatens us was around long before America was....it's pretty much in it's pristine dark age form still.
Regimes cause terrorism? What regime was responsible for 9/11? Which state in the middle east was primarily responsible for the 9/11 attack? I can tell you who it wasn't if you'd like..
im saying you're dumb for posting what liberals in the ME think about us. one minute they're our friends, and the next they are not.
but i wouldnt expect you to understand that
Saidi, Pakistan, Afghanistan...Egypt and Syria to a lesser extent.
The three main Sunni Muslim States basically.
Which state in the middle east was primarily responsible for the 9/11 attack? I can tell you who it wasn't if you'd like..
It was Saudi...
But we can't just go in and change the regime in Saudi like we can in Syria, Iraq, and hopefully Iran. Militarily we can...but it would be a horrible reason to do so.
Don't get me wrong...first time an American city gets nuked...Gloves are off with Saudi and their oppressive culture IMO...but that is the worst case scenario.
Can't do it with Egypt...
Can't do it with Pakistan.
Iraq was being used as a recruiting tool already for terrorism though...in particular the crippling sanctions that were causing millions of Iraqi Baby deaths during their time. Usama himself cited that as justification for the 911 attacks.
I know you'd rather kill the babies than the terrorists, but, tough .
The Military being based in Saudi was another recruiting tool...
Sanctions are gone(and so is Saddam) and the infidel military is no longer violating the holiest muslim ground in Saudi.
Now...we got terrorists fighting terrorists, and dying...as well as getting blitzed by our military.
We got the two leading nations of the two muslim sects squaring off on each other, instead of us...
Sorry but this is a much better situation for us, and for fixing the oppressive post colonial regimes installed by Europe.
LMAO...you mean they might hate America? That makes them different from our own liberals how?
Not a bit.
Whether you guys realize it or not...you side with the cause that hates America. That's whole purpose during the Vietnam War was to serve the goals of the China and the Soviet Union....that's the cause you champion.
As you protest our all volunteer millitary.
What, the domino threat? Where does one find your reading material? Are you getting you're information from the "not yet built Bush library"?
You seem to think that any country that won't bow to us is fair game. How long have you been xenophobic too?
Why do you always end up at the cul de sac with a bevy of nukes or a bushel of s?
You say we can't do Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi? why not? Then why bother? We can't do Iraq and apparently Afghanistan either. Doesn't it bother you at all that we've failed on such a broad scale? The country has no faith in bush's ability to succeed in anything. They can't even handle the most minute of details. He claims that dems are preventing the generals to conduct a war when he is the first to dispose of them. How is a surge going to change the same method of failure? How are security forces that are comprised of seperate sects going to work together? Ain't gonna happen. The hate runs deeper than compromise. He has absolutely no skills in persuading people to unite. That will never change. Nobody here wants us to lose, it's the manufactured bull to war that cannot be erased. He can't be trusted.
Who loves hearing what the American Left have to say in the Middle East?
Their terrorists.
Their suicide bombers.
Their fascists.
That's the company you keep, Usama.
Their sane ones don't agree with you at all.
Nor do I imagine, the millions of immigrants living in America that left because of those regimes.
Out of touch fool...you side with Hitler.
Just stop lying about it...s'all I am asking.
Don't spout your beliefs under the lie that you are in any way championing Democracy or a better way of life for those people in the long run.
Because you don't...
You want to ignore it, and hope the problem goes away.
Weapons won't solve the problem, unless you intend to kill them all. Would that be in your playbook? Has there ever been a family more politically connected to the saudi's than Bush? You think they'll attack the saudi's if a nuke explodes here? why? Just because? they won't do anything about pakistan. why haven't you come out with rage about the failures of pakistan? Are you bored with Afghanistan? Have you lost interest in hunting down and killing terrorist? Aren't terrorist our main enemy? Why complain about other countries when we've failed the first 3?
whottt you really are a child. everything with you is reduced down to a simplistic rhetoric that you spew like diarrhea out of your vagina.
i dont hate america. i love this country. so much that I cant stand to see it driven into the weak state that you and your brethren have accomplished thus far. you and bush have done nothing to make us safer against terrorism, except overstretch our army, incite a civil war, and manage to fragment al qaeda into splinter cells all over the world because the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq were not done properly with enough troops.
but because i protest the war i hate america? do us all a favor and grow up. no one follows that as a logical conclusion except for ing intellectual babies
QFT
The decision was made to go to war.
The opponent we now face cannot beat us militarily.
Their only hope is a political victory.
You cannot change the decision to take us into war, it is done.
Our military is volunteer 100%.
A referendum was held for the American people to decide the future for Iraq, the winning vote was cast in favor of winning the war.
Even now, we still have people joining to fight, of their own free will.
This is the reality...
You do not serve the US troops.
You do no serve the will of the American people.
You do not serve wining this war.
You simply serve losing it...who does that benefit?
You guys have all over the concept of peaceful transfer of power, you've all over the concept of the electoral college that has served this country for centuries, and you've all over the concept of civil discourse with your obnoxious and venemous anto-war rhetoric.
You do not serve the aims of the will of this country, you do not serve the aims of the people who seek similar rights for those in the mid-east that you are graced to live with every day here.
You do not serve anyone but our opponents in this war, and losing it.
And your opinion is not the majority, nor was it the will of the people.
And you have a right to voice your opinion...and I have a right to be critical of the message, as well as it's method of delivery.
"A referendum was held for the American people to decide the future for Iraq, the winning vote was cast in favor of winning the war"
A ing dubya-sucking Whott lie. There was no referendum on the Iraq war, before the war. On the contrary, in the 2006 elections, the US kicked out the Repugs and fired dubya and head, LOUD AND CLEAR, for their lying and incompetence in starting, ing up and losing the Iraq war.
"we still have people joining to fight, of their own free will."
A tiny minority consisting of ex-cons, bottom of the barrel losers, poor, rural kids by the 1000s, seduced by huge sign-up bonuses, while 10s of millions of their contemporaries with educations and jobs refuse to enlist, like whott, ahf, srj, clanny, lamarcus bryant, t_pork, etc.
Whott just posted the most amazing pile of unsupported, blindly ideological, dubya-sucking bull . He's gettting desparate, he's losing it, as he sees his dubya and dubya's bull war, beyond any doubt, ing up US security interests. Whott is part of a tiny minority that has lost, has backed a loser, and is now overwhelmed by a huge majority of US who are against dubya and head, and against their bull war of grab for oil that has NEVER served the US interests, only the PNAC/AIE/neo-con grab for oil.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
