War is Hell
First of all, that goofy freshman congresswoman Jean Schmidt DIDN'T call John Murtha a coward, and the silly wench should not have retracted her statement. Her mistake was thinking that she could make such a statement and it would be OK; she should have known how it would go over. Second of all, I know Marines, I'm related to Marines, and she was right; they would rather die than run. Third, I am proud to be a citizen of the same country as John Murtha and I hope that in the end, my life was worth the sacrifice that he made as a Marine. But the man has been blinded by politics.
In response to John Murtha's request for a quick pullout of US troops in Iraq, representative Sam Johnson said, "When I was a POW, I was scared to death when our Congress talked about pulling the plug, that I would be left there forever. I know what it does to morale, I know what it does to the mission, and so help me God, I will never, ever let our nation make that mistake again."
I tend to agree with Representative Johnson, though not blindly. It occurs to me that it has been over 4 years since the attack on the WTC, and there hasn't been one attack on US soil since. It also occurs to me that "insurgent" attacks in Iraq are targeting mostly Iraqis, not US soldiers. It also occurs to me that the number of soldiers that have died in Iraq since the beginning of the war is less by over a third than the number of civilians that died in the WTC attacks. So, can someone please tell me how the war in Iraq is such a massive failure?
My latest issue of The Atlantic magazine has an article that says that if we leave now, the "insurgency" will end. What a nice little Utopia the writer of the article lives in. He's got it all figured out and if we would just listen to him, everything would be OK. It's not an insurgency, people. IT'S NOT AN INSURGENCY. Believe whatever media crap you want to believe, but the word insurgency puts a very pretty face on it as far as I'm concerned. It's terrorism - period. We need to start calling it what it is. It's wanna-be despots trying to rule by fear just like their hero Saddam. It's what made Saddam rich and, more importantly, powerful. And those two things are more attractive to these "religious" terrorists than anything. You can't deal with terrorists through diplomacy. You're telling me that "insurgents" are killing Iraqis because they want the US to leave? What kind of stupid reasoning is that? Stupid people can't elude one of the best militaries on earth; al-Zarqawi and his ilk aren't stupid – don't deceive yourself. The people who reason that he is an insurgent are stupid. What's going on in Iraq is much bigger than we are lead to believe and it will get much bigger and much messier if the "occupiers" leave.
Diplomacy is dead in the Middle East. It died the day Mohammed got stoned and dehydrated in the desert and started talking to demons. No Muslim country is going to deal diplomatically with a non-Muslim country because Mohammed didn't mince words with regard to people like me. He was very clear that all infidels should die. See, Muslims believe that we are born Muslim, so those who aren't Muslims as adults have at some point rejected Allah, thus becoming infidels. They don't want to convert us, they want to kill us. The Muslim countries that we consider friends are after the same thing everyone else is after – MONEY. The US has lots of it, and they would rather kill us slowly by taking as much of it as they can while they can. But the goal is the same.
One thing is very clear about Iraq: In large part, the focus of Islamist terrorism has been shifted from the citizens of the United States to Iraq, thousands of miles away. Does that bode well for our armed forces? Absolutely not. But there's no draft right now. They are well aware what they signed up for, and the ones I have talked to are more than happy to fight for their country. And frankly, that's exactly what they're doing. Liberals can call it what they want, but if the administration had ulterior motives for the war, please tell me what those motives are. The president lied, right? He twisted the intelligence to deceive congress into approving the war, didn't he? BUT WHY? Please tell me why! You say he did it to help his buddies over at Halliburton? Please get a life. Or just die already. If you really believe that, don't worry about being ashamed of yourself because I'm ashamed for you. If you really believe Bush sent soldiers to war for money, you are truly a disgusting human being. If you can fathom such evil, I have reason to believe you are capable of worse.
In response to John Murtha's request for a quick pullout of US troops in Iraq, representative Sam Johnson said, "When I was a POW, I was scared to death when our Congress talked about pulling the plug, that I would be left there forever. I know what it does to morale, I know what it does to the mission, and so help me God, I will never, ever let our nation make that mistake again."
I tend to agree with Representative Johnson, though not blindly. It occurs to me that it has been over 4 years since the attack on the WTC, and there hasn't been one attack on US soil since. It also occurs to me that "insurgent" attacks in Iraq are targeting mostly Iraqis, not US soldiers. It also occurs to me that the number of soldiers that have died in Iraq since the beginning of the war is less by over a third than the number of civilians that died in the WTC attacks. So, can someone please tell me how the war in Iraq is such a massive failure?
My latest issue of The Atlantic magazine has an article that says that if we leave now, the "insurgency" will end. What a nice little Utopia the writer of the article lives in. He's got it all figured out and if we would just listen to him, everything would be OK. It's not an insurgency, people. IT'S NOT AN INSURGENCY. Believe whatever media crap you want to believe, but the word insurgency puts a very pretty face on it as far as I'm concerned. It's terrorism - period. We need to start calling it what it is. It's wanna-be despots trying to rule by fear just like their hero Saddam. It's what made Saddam rich and, more importantly, powerful. And those two things are more attractive to these "religious" terrorists than anything. You can't deal with terrorists through diplomacy. You're telling me that "insurgents" are killing Iraqis because they want the US to leave? What kind of stupid reasoning is that? Stupid people can't elude one of the best militaries on earth; al-Zarqawi and his ilk aren't stupid – don't deceive yourself. The people who reason that he is an insurgent are stupid. What's going on in Iraq is much bigger than we are lead to believe and it will get much bigger and much messier if the "occupiers" leave.
Diplomacy is dead in the Middle East. It died the day Mohammed got stoned and dehydrated in the desert and started talking to demons. No Muslim country is going to deal diplomatically with a non-Muslim country because Mohammed didn't mince words with regard to people like me. He was very clear that all infidels should die. See, Muslims believe that we are born Muslim, so those who aren't Muslims as adults have at some point rejected Allah, thus becoming infidels. They don't want to convert us, they want to kill us. The Muslim countries that we consider friends are after the same thing everyone else is after – MONEY. The US has lots of it, and they would rather kill us slowly by taking as much of it as they can while they can. But the goal is the same.
One thing is very clear about Iraq: In large part, the focus of Islamist terrorism has been shifted from the citizens of the United States to Iraq, thousands of miles away. Does that bode well for our armed forces? Absolutely not. But there's no draft right now. They are well aware what they signed up for, and the ones I have talked to are more than happy to fight for their country. And frankly, that's exactly what they're doing. Liberals can call it what they want, but if the administration had ulterior motives for the war, please tell me what those motives are. The president lied, right? He twisted the intelligence to deceive congress into approving the war, didn't he? BUT WHY? Please tell me why! You say he did it to help his buddies over at Halliburton? Please get a life. Or just die already. If you really believe that, don't worry about being ashamed of yourself because I'm ashamed for you. If you really believe Bush sent soldiers to war for money, you are truly a disgusting human being. If you can fathom such evil, I have reason to believe you are capable of worse.

3 Comments:
1. BS
2. BS
3. BS
4. I said soldiers, not casualties. I meant US soldiers, but I thought that was understood.
5. Great, whatever they want.
Plus (6). Once again, BS. The outrage was with the statement.
Attack machine... funny stuff.
Another excellent post, Mitch.
Why the hell do you still read the Atlantic Monthly. Ugh!
11 23 05
Excellent post and cool perspective, as usual Mitch/Mike. And who in tarnation is this irreverent troll with all the cussing? Well a wise man once said that a man only cusses because he doesn't know the right words to say; e.g. how ignorant!!!
Happy Thxgiving:)
Post a Comment
<< Home