More Troops???!!

[lemonjello]

In poker they call it - going "all in".

Remember back when the almost the whole world was ready to help the US find OBL and they were basically lined up to help in Afghanistan? After 9/11 there were even candlelight marches of support in Iran.

I think this is a feeble attempt by Bush to somehow preserve his presidential legacy. He was faced with 3 options:

1. Stay the course. No win situation and history marks him down as one of the worst presidents ever with his colossal blunder in Iraq.

2. Withdraw. No win situation and history marks him down as one of the worst presidents ever with his colossal blunder in Iraq.

3. Add 20,000 troops. Improves the chances of winning the peace in Iraq by about 1%, probably escalates killing of civilians and troops. But hey, there is a small chance he won't go down as the worst president ever, so these additional deaths are probably worth it.

I guess he is choosing option 3.

[studentofthemarket]

Being for something before you are against it

Check this out.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm

it seems that 20k More was a good idea until Bush proposed it.

OTOH, if you are all about ensuring the failure of the opposition part(the Republicans) as opposed to the failure of our islamic opposition on all fronts, it must all make sense.


student

[Runner]

I tend to agree with this
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>


How the left led us into 9/11
The Clinton and Carter administrations made the U.S. look like a weak, attractive target for terrorists.
By Dinesh D'Souza, a fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, is the author, most recently, of "The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11."
January 18, 2007


In considering a funding cutoff for U.S. troops in Iraq, the liberal leadership in Congress runs the risk of making the United States more vulnerable to future attacks, not just in the Middle East but here at home. To understand this, it's not enough to revisit the factors that led to the Iraq invasion. We must consider the roots of 9/11 itself. Only by understanding the policies that sowed the seeds of 9/11 can we intelligently decide how best to proceed in fighting the war on terror.

Pundits on the left say that 9/11 was the result of a "blowback" of resistance from the Islamic world against U.S. foreign policy. At first glance, this seems to make no sense. American colonialism in the Middle East? The U.S. has no history of colonialism there. Washington's support for unelected dictatorial regimes in the region? The Muslims can't be outraged about this, because there are no other kinds of regimes in the region. U.S. support for Israel and wars against the Muslims? Yes, but the U.S. has frequently fought on the side of the Muslims, as in Afghanistan in the 1980s or in the Persian Gulf War.

But in a sense the liberal pundits are right. The U.S. made two gigantic foreign policy blunders in recent decades that did sow the seeds of 9/11. What the liberals haven't recognized is that these blunders were the direct result of their policies and actions, and were carried out by Democratic presidents — Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

To understand this, we need a little perspective. Radical Islam became a global force in 1979, when it captured its first major state, Iran. Before that, radical organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood were fighting losing battles to overthrow their local governments. This changed with the success of the Khomeini regime in Iran. The Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini was the first Muslim leader to describe the U.S. as the "Great Satan" and to counsel martyrdom and jihad against it. Iran continues to be a model for radical Muslims.

Khomeini's ascent to power was aided by Carter's policies. Carter came into office stressing his support for human rights. His advisors told him that he could not consistently support the shah of Iran, who had secret police and was widely accused of violating human rights. The administration began to withdraw its support and finally pulled the rug out from under the shah, forcing him to step down.

The result was Khomeini, whose regime was vastly more tyrannical than the shah's. The Khomeini revolution provided state sponsorship for Islamic radicalism and terrorism and paved the way for Osama bin Laden and 9/11.

Clinton's policies also helped to provoke 9/11. After the Cold War, leading Islamic radicals returned to their home countries. Bin Laden left Afghanistan and went back to Saudi Arabia; Ayman Zawahiri returned to Egypt. They focused on fighting their own rulers — what they termed the "near enemy" — in order to establish states under Islamic law. But in the mid- to late 1990s, these radicals shifted strategy. They decided to stop fighting the near enemy and to attack the "far enemy," the U.S.

The world's sole superpower would seem to be much more formidable than local Muslim rulers such as Hosni Mubarak in Egypt or the Saudi royal family. Bin Laden argued, however, that the far enemy was actually weaker and more vulnerable. He was confident that when kicked in their vital organs, Americans would pack up and run. Just like in Vietnam. Just like in Mogadishu.

Bin Laden saw his theory of American weakness vindicated during the Clinton era. In 1993, Islamic radicals bombed the World Trade Center. The Clinton administration did little. In 1996, Muslim terrorists attacked the Khobar Towers facility on a U.S. base in Saudi Arabia. No response. In 1998, Al Qaeda bombed two U.S. embassies in Africa. Clinton responded with a few perfunctory strikes in Sudan and Afghanistan. These did no real harm to Al Qaeda and only strengthened the perception of American ineptitude. In 2000, Islamic radicals bombed the U.S. destroyer Cole. Again, the Clinton team failed to act. By his own admission, Bin Laden concluded that his suspicion of American pusillanimity and weakness was correct. He became emboldened to plot the 9/11 attacks.

Still, the 2001 attacks might have been averted had the Clinton administration launched an effective strike against Bin Laden in the years leading up to them. Clinton has said he made every effort to get Bin Laden during his second term. Yet former CIA agent Michael Scheuer estimates that there were about 10 chances to capture or kill Bin Laden during this period and that the Clinton people failed to capitalize on any of them.

Between 1996 and mid-2000, Bin Laden was not in deep hiding. He gave sermons in Kandahar's largest mosque. He talked openly on his satellite phone. He also granted a number of media interviews: in 1996, with author Robert Fisk; in 1997, with Peter Arnett of CNN; in 1998, with John Miller of ABC News; in 1999, with a journalist affiliated with Time magazine. Isn't it strange that all these people could find Bin Laden but the Clinton administration couldn't?

Two lessons can be drawn from these sorry episodes. The first one, derived from Carter's actions, is: In getting rid of the bad regime, make sure that you don't get a worse one. This happened in Iran and could happen again, in Iraq, if leading Democrats in Congress have their way. The second lesson, derived from Clinton's inaction, is that the perception of weakness emboldens our enemies. If the Muslim insurgents and terrorists believe that the U.S. is divided and squeamish about winning the war on terror, they are likely to escalate their attacks on Americans abroad and at home. In that case, 9/11 will be only the beginning.

[lemonjello]

Ever wonder why D'souza is coming out with that "analysis" now and where the same book was in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 or 2006?

The Republican spin meisters have figured out they are going to be mashed in the next election so they tell D'souza to write a book blaming the Dems and take it on the talk show circuit. It's so transparent they should just put a disclaimer right on the book - "hey, we're trying to herd some sheeple around with this here book, ok?"

Did Carter, Daddy Bush and Clinton screw up on Al Qaeda? Sure. Did Baby Bush screw up? Well, his administration did get that memo stating Al Qaeda going to attack the USA using aircraft, they couldn't find OBL and stopped looking for him, preferring to attack Iraq and Iran instead for readily apparent reasons at huge costs of blood and money with negligible results. Oh yeah - "mission accomplished".

Lemonjello - not a republican or a democrat, thanks for the offer tho

[Runner]

> >> WHAT SENATOR JOHN GLENN SAID
> >>
> >> Things that make you think a little:
> >>
> >> There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq in January.
> >> In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the
> >> Month of January.That's just one American city,
> >> About as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq.
> >>
> >> When some claim that President Bush shouldn't
> >> Have started this war, state the following:
> >>
> >> A. FDR led us into World War II.
> >>
> >> B. Germany never attacked us; Japan did.
> >> From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost ..
> >> An average of 112,500 per year.
> >>
> >> C. Truman finished that war and started one in Korea.
> >> North Korea never attacked us.
> >> From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost ...
> >> An average of 18,334 per year.
> >>
> >> D. John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
> >> Vietnam never attacked us.
> >>
> >> E. Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
> >> From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost .
> >> An average of 5,800 per year.
> >>
> >> F. Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.
> >> Bosnia never attacked us.
> >> He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by
> >> Sudan and did nothing Osama has attacked us on Multiple occasions.
> >>
> >> G. In the years since terrorists attacked us , President Bush has
> >> liberated
> >> two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled Al-Qaida, put nuclear
> >> inspectors in Libya, Iran, and North Korea without firing a shot,
and
> >> captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
> >>
> >> The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking.
> >>
> >> But It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the
> >> Branch Davidian compound.
> >> That was a 51-day operation.
> >>
> >> We've been looking for evidence for chemical weapons in Iraq for less
> >> time than it took Hillary Clinton to find
> >> The Rose Law Firm billing records.
> >>
> >> It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to
> >> destroy
> >> the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police
> >> after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick
> >>
> >> It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in
> >> Florida!!!!
> >>
> >> Our Commander-In- Chief is doing a HARD JOB!
> >> The Military morale is high!
> >>
> >> The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to realize the facts
> >>
> >> But Wait there's more!
> >>
> >> JOHN GLENN (ON THE SENATE FLOOR) Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:13
> >>
> >> Some people still don't understand why military personnel do what they
do
> >> for a living. This exchange between Senators John Glenn and Senator
> >> Howard Metzenbaum is worth reading. Not only is it a pretty
impressive
> >> impromptu
> >> speech, but it's also a good example of one man's explanation of why
men
> >> and
> >> women in the armed Services do what they do for a living
> >>
> >> This is a typical, though sad, example of what some who have never
served
> >> think
> >> of the military.
> >>
> >> Senator Metzenbaum (speaking to Senator Glenn):
> >> "How can you run for Senate when you've never held a real job?"
> >>
> >> Senator Glenn (D-Ohio):
> >> "I served 23 years in the United States Marine Corps.
> >> I served through two wars. I flew 149 missions.
> >> My plane was hit by anti-aircraft fire on 12 different occasions. I
was
> >> in
> >> the space program. It wasn't my checkbook, Howard; it was my life on
the
> >> line. It was not a nine-to-five job, where I took time off to take the
> >> daily
> >> cash receipts to the bank."
> >>
> >> "I ask you to go with me ... As I went the other day...To a veteran's
> >> hospital
> >> and look those men ...With their mangled bodies, in the eye, and tell
> >> THEM
> >> they didn't hold a job!
> >>
> >> You go with me to the Space Program at NASA and go, as I have gone, to
> >> the widows and orphans of Ed White, Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee...
> >> And you look those kids in the eye and tell them that their DADS
didn't
> >> hold a job.
> >>
> >> You go with me on Memorial Day and you stand in Arlington National
> >> Cemetery,
> >> where I have more friends buried than I'd like to remember, and you
watch
> >> those
> >> waving flags. You stand there, and you think about this nation, And
you
> >> tell ME
> >> that those people didn't have a job?
> >>
> >> What about you?"
> >>
> >> For those who don't remember During WW.II, Howard Metzenbaum was an
> >> attorney representing the Communist Party in the USA.
> >>
> >> Now he's a Senator!
> >>
> >> If you can read this, thank a teacher.
> >> If you are reading it in English thank a Veteran.

[New-born baby]

What a post!

Runner,
What a post!

It sickened me to see the Hollywood crowd leading demonstrators in Washington. Jane Fonda was there again.

[Runner]

Runner,
What a post!

It sickened me to see the Hollywood crowd leading demonstrators in Washington. Jane Fonda was there again.

NB, God help this Country should some whacked out liberal get elected as President!

[lemonjello]

Not sure who wrote the first part - typical Ann Coulter histrionics? Except for George Will, most of the Repub talking heads are poor at historical facts like Ann. The Dems don't usually try to back up their arguments with historical facts so they don't seem to have that particular problem.

> >> WHAT SENATOR JOHN GLENN SAID
> >>
> >> Things that make you think a little:
> >>
> >> There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq in January.
> >> In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the
> >> Month of January.That's just one American city,
> >> About as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq.
> >>
> >> When some claim that President Bush shouldn't
> >> Have started this war, state the following:
> >>
> >> A. FDR led us into World War II.
> >>
> >> B. Germany never attacked us; Japan did.
> >> From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost ..
> >> An average of 112,500 per year.

Whoever wrote this can't seriously be comparing the threat from Saddam's Iraq to Hitler's Wehrmacht. If there were no Gulf War II the US would never be speaking Arabic (maybe Spanish soon tho thanks to current porous border policies). But , if the US had not entered WWII a lot more people would be speaking German today. Iraq was practically destitute before the Gulf War II invasion due to years of sanctions. Anyone not clear on the history of the entry of the US in the European theater should read some of the speeches of Winston Churchill.

https://www.winstonchurchill.org

The valiant British were up against a terrible enemy and the US help was in doubt. Here is part of his famous speech indirectly but clearly appealing to the US for assistance.

June 1940

"...Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."


> >> G. In the years since terrorists attacked us , President Bush has
> >> liberated
> >> two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled Al-Qaida, put nuclear
> >> inspectors in Libya, Iran, and North Korea without firing a shot,
and
> >> captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
> >>

This must have been written a few years back - the Taliban are apparently not quite crushed yet. And where is that pesky OBL? Well, W doesn't think about him much. Saddam killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians - Gulf War II is catching up - estimates are 50,000 civilians.

iraqbodycount.net

[ParkTwain]

Battle of the Teutoburg Forest

Runner wrote:

> >> If you can read this, thank a teacher.
> >> If you are reading it in English thank a Veteran.


You might consider, If you are reading it in English (a Germanic language), thank the Germanic tribes that ambushed and mostly destroyed the Roman army at the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest. The historical facts of this battle and the work in our day to determine those facts are a very interesting story.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Teutoburg_Forest

//
The Battle of the Teutoburg Forest took place in the year 9 A.D. when an alliance of Germanic tribes led by Arminius, the son of Segimer of the Cherusci, ambushed and destroyed three Roman legions led by Publius Quinctilius Varus.

The outcome of the battle established the Rhine as the boundary of the Roman Empire for the next few hundred years, until the decline of the Roman influence in the West. The Roman Empire was never able to conquer Germania, although many attempts were made. ...

Aftermath [of the Battle]

Upon hearing of the defeat, the emperor Augustus, according to Roman author and historian Suetonius in his book Lives of the Twelve Caesars, shouted "Quintili Vare, legiones redde!" ('Quintilius Varus, give me back my legions!') Some authors misquote this as "give me back my eagles"; see I Claudius, by Robert Graves.

Though the shock of the slaughter was enormous, the Romans for a short time gave up their plans to subdue the Germanic tribes during the next years. In 14, a large army (estimated at 50,000 men), backed up by naval forces under the command of Germanicus, drove into what is now northern Germany, though according to Tacitus the campaign had not been sanctioned by the emperor Tiberius. While the force quickly overwhelmed the Germanic tribes and managed to reclaim the standards lost under Varus, they failed to permanently break up the Germanic coalition or consolidate the territory seized by Germanicus. [2] Tacitus says that a Roman detachment under Germanicus was the first to reconnoiter the site of the battle. According to Tacitus, they found heaps of bleached bones and severed skulls nailed to trees, which they buried, "looking on all as kinsfolk and of their own blood".

In 16, Emperor Tiberius decided to stop all operations against the Germanic tribes and relinquished any claim on territory gained by Germanicus.

Nevertheless the battle was an important milestone in the Roman attempt of taking Germania which seriously started in 14 BC by Drusus. This had long term historical consequences as it set the boundary between Romance languages and Germanic languages.
//

http://www.livius.org/te-tg/teutoburg/teutoburg01.htm

through

http://www.livius.org/te-tg/teutoburg/teutoburg07.html

//
Yet, the battle was important. The Roman empire met its limits. Tiberius accepted that there were areas without towns that were not predigested for Roman rule. During the next centuries, the Germanic tribes learned from Rome, and Rome learned from them. But always, Germania remained independent.

This had serious consequences. One example may suffice to illustrate this: if the Romans had kept the country between the Rhine and Elbe, the North Sea tribes that were later known as Saxons would have spoken Latin. The English language would -for better or worse- never have existed, and German would have been marginal. One result would have been a considerably poorer understanding of reality: without the German language, a philosopher like Heidegger would have been impossible. And without the Anglo-Saxon dialects, these lines would have been written in a romanic language not unlike French or Spanish. The great linguistic division of today's western world would simply not exist without the battle in the Teutoburg Forest.
//

See also the web site for the museum at Kalkriese, Germany:

http://www.kalkriese-varusschlacht.de/englisch/start_eng.html

[ParkTwain]

Film &quot;The Power of Nightmares&quot;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_Nightmares

(includes hyperlinks to parts 1, 2, and 3 of the film)
//
The Power of Nightmares, subtitled The Rise of the Politics of Fear, is a BBC series of documentary films, written and produced by Adam Curtis.

This documentary argues that during the 20th Century politicians lost the power to inspire the masses, and that the optimistic visions and ideologies they had offered were perceived to have failed. The film asserts that politicians consequently sought a new role that would restore their power and authority. Curtis, who also narrates the series, declares in the film's introduction that “Instead of delivering dreams, politicians now promise to protect us: from nightmares”. To illustrate this Curtis compares the rise of the American neoconservatives and radical Islamists, believing that both are closely connected; that some popular beliefs about these groups are inaccurate; and that both movements have benefited from exaggerating the scale of the terrorist threat.
//

[mrmarket]

Cockroaches?

I see our situation in Iraq as analogous to trying to rid all of the cockroaches in your house.

You can easily get rid of the first 60% of them and then each incremental cockroach gets more and more difficult to exterminate.

There comes a point where the prize isn't worth the game. Do you turn your attention to enjoying your life and learn to live peacefully with the remaining cockroaches?

Or do you ruin your life trying to exterminate every last one, because you are stubborn and stupid? You ignore your family, forsake your employment and obsess over that last cockroach.

[Lyehopper]

I see our situation in Iraq as analogous to trying to rid all of the cockroaches in your house.

You can easily get rid of the first 60% of them and then each incremental cockroach gets more and more difficult to exterminate.

There comes a point where the prize isn't worth the game. Do you turn your attention to enjoying your life and learn to live peacefully with the remaining cockroaches?

Or do you ruin your life trying to exterminate every last one, because you are stubborn and stupid? You ignore your family, forsake your employment and obsess over that last cockroach.

There are no cockroaches or mice or fleas or any other pests in my house. It's not a big problem, my wife keeps a very clean and orderly house and I make sure no pests can enter the dwelling. Now mind you, If I ever have detected a pest in my house? I work diligently and without mercy to resolve the "pest problem" quickly....

And actually I get some sick pleasure from trapping mice, I especially like those sticky traps you can buy now. I keep pelletized grain in my barn, so naturally mice and field rats can be a problem there. I don't like to use rat poison and a cat won't work because I have a few dogs that will snap a cats neck in about two seconds flat. So I have a couple of HUUUUGE fat black snakes living in my barn, they work very well. I also put those sticky traps along the top rim of my gravity flow wagon. Mice are pretty stupid, they'll jump up there and get stuck on those traps time and time again. I have seen two mice stuck on the same trap, it's like one comes over to investigate why his buddy is stuck.... And then he gets stuck too. SsSsSssssss!

If "they" would give me the $Billions of dollars and the resources "they" are expending on this war.... And give me 100% complete control to do as I please.... I'd employee some rather sticky methods and resolve the problem within twelve months, maybe sooner.... AND.... The great thing with "farming out" this deal to a "private pest control company" is that no "direct" blame can be laid on any specific country for the specific "perceived" negative consequences of the clean up operations..... Step #1: Ban all media from the country. Step #2: Classified.

[peanuts]

There are no cockroaches or mice or fleas or any other pests in my house. It's not a big problem, my wife keeps a very clean and orderly house and I make sure no pests can enter the dwelling. Now mind you, If I ever have detected a pest in my house? I work diligently and without mercy to resolve the "pest problem" quickly....

And actually I get some sick pleasure from trapping mice, I especially like those sticky traps you can buy now. I keep pelletized grain in my barn, so naturally mice and field rats can be a problem there. I don't like to use rat poison and a cat won't work because I have a few dogs that will snap a cats neck in about two seconds flat. So I have a couple of HUUUUGE fat black snakes living in my barn, they work very well. I also put those sticky traps along the top rim of my gravity flow wagon. Mice are pretty stupid, they'll jump up there and get stuck on those traps time and time again. I have seen two mice stuck on the same trap, it's like one comes over to investigate why his buddy is stuck.... And then he gets stuck too. SsSsSssssss!

If "they" would give me the $Billions of dollars and the resources "they" are expending on this war.... And give me 100% complete control to do as I please.... I'd employee some rather sticky methods and resolve the problem within twelve months, maybe sooner.... AND.... The great thing with "farming out" this deal to a "private pest control company" is that no "direct" blame can be laid on any specific country for the specific "perceived" negative consequences of the clean up operations..... Step #1: Ban all media from the country. Step #2: Classified.

What do the mercs do after they're done... do you exterminate them , too? That sure is alot of power to hand over to an unaccountable entity... and then you pay them for it? That's how rogue governments get established

[Lyehopper]

Ticker.... RAID

What do the mercs do after they're done... do you exterminate them , too? That sure is alot of power to hand over to an unaccountable entity... and then you pay them for it? That's how rogue governments get established

I ain't out to save the world.... Just get the job done and ca$h out.

Mine is a simple business proposal.... I'm no world leader or politician. If I clean out the "pests" and then they come back after I'm gone?.... It just means job security for my "company".... When the roaches return, "they" call me back for a new contract.... Heck, I might even take the new company public. Imagine what kind of "hostile takeover's" we could orchestrate?! LOL!

[lemonjello]

Blackwater may already have that contract. No bid of course.

I ain't out to save the world.... Just get the job done and ca$h out.

Mine is a simple business proposal.... I'm no world leader or politician. If I clean out the "pests" and then they come back after I'm gone?.... It just means job security for my "company".... When the roaches return, "they" call me back for a new contract.... Heck, I might even take the new company public. Imagine what kind of "hostile takeover's" we could orchestrate?! LOL!