Piranhas Forum banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
The man
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
SURRENDER BY ANY OTHER NAME ...
December 13, 2006

How did we go from winning the war in Iraq to losing overnight? Was this decided by the same committee that changed "Peking" to "Beijing"?

These word changes are a fortiori evidence that liberals are part of a conspiracy. On what date did "horrible" and "actress" vanish from the English language to be replaced with "horrific" and "actor"? Who decided that? (Meanwhile, I'm still writing "Puff Daddy" in my nightly dream journal when everybody else has started calling him "Diddy.")

When did "B.C." (before Christ) and "A.D." (anno Domini, "in the year of the Lord") get replaced with "BCE" (before the common era) and "CE" (common era)? "Withdrawal" is "redeployment," "liberal" is "progressive," and "traitorous" is "patriotic."

These new linguistic conventions - like going from "winning" to "losing" in Iraq - simply spread like an invisible bacterial invasion.

To be sure, last month the Democrats did win a narrow majority in Congress for the first time in more than a decade. And it cannot be denied that for the past 50 years, Democrats have orchestrated humiliating foreign policy defeats for America. So it is understandable that some might interpret their midterm gains as a mandate for another humiliating defeat.

But that's not what the Democrats told Americans when they were running for office. To the contrary, they claimed to be gun-totin' hawks. A shockingly high number of Democratic candidates this year actually fought in wars. And not just the war on poverty, either - real wars, against men with guns.

It was a specific plan of Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Rep. Rahm Emanuel to fake out the voters by recruiting anti-war veterans to run against Republicans. (And when did "chairman" become "chair"?)

To the credit of the voters - especially the American Legion and VFW - the Democrats didn't fool enough Americans to even match the average midterm gains for the party out of power.

But the point is: You can't run as a phony patriot and then claim your victory is a mandate for surrender. That would be like awarding yourself undeserved Purple Hearts and then pretending to throw them over the White House wall in protest. No, that's not fair - nothing could be as contemptible as throwing someone else's medals on the ground in protest.

Is it the report of the "Iraq Surrender Group" that suddenly caused everyone to say we're losing?

The ISG report was about what you'd expect if the ladies from "The View" were asked to come up with a victory plan for Iraq. We need to ask Syria to tell Hamas to stop calling for the destruction of Israel. Duh! "Dear Hamas, Do you like killing Jews, or do you LIKE killing Jews? Check yes or no."

Most of the esteemed members of the ISG were last seen on the "Dead or Alive?" Web site. Vernon Jordan's most recent claim to fame was getting Monica Lewinsky a job at Revlon when she was threatening Bill Clinton with the truth. He's going to figure out an honorable way to get out of Iraq?

We're still trying to figure out a six-part test from some decision Sandra Day O'Connor wrote back in 1984, but now she's going to tell us what to do in Iraq.

Have things changed on the ground in Iraq? Are our troops being routed? Hardly. The number of U.S. fatalities has gone from a high of 860 deaths in 2004 to 845 in 2005, to 695 through November of this year. If the Islamic fascists double their rate of killing Americans in the next month, there will still be fewer American fatalities in Iraq this year than in the previous two years.

Admittedly, it would be a little easier to track our progress in Iraq if the Pentagon would tell us how many of them we're killing, but apparently our Pentagon is too spooked by the insurgents posing as civilians to mention the deaths of our enemies.

Moreover, it might seem churlish to mention the number of Islamic lunatics we've killed during the holy month of Ramadan. Half the time we do anything to them, it's "the holy month of Ramadan." It's always Ramadan. When on Earth is Ramadan over?

It's true that no one anticipated that al-Qaida sympathizers would stream into Iraq to fight the Great Satan after Saddam fled to a spider hole, but that's because everyone expected al-Qaida to be fighting us here.

Like "Peking," that's something else we can't say anymore: the amazing absence of another 9/11-style terrorist attack in the past five years. The heart of the insurgency in Iraq is, by definition, composed of Islamic terrorists who hate the Great Satan, own an overnight bag and are willing to travel to kill Americans. But don't worry: The Iraq Surrender Group feels sure they won't come here if we pull out of Iraq.

If absolutely nothing changed in Iraq over the next few years - if it didn't continue to get better and if the savages never lost heart (I'm assuming they subscribe to "TimesSelect") - by 2010, 6,000 brave American troops will have died to prevent another 9/11 terrorist attack on American soil for a decade.

If that's a war Americans think we're "losing," Osama bin Laden was right: We are a paper tiger.

COPYRIGHT 2006 ANN COULTER
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,919 Posts
kinda makes you think huh??

no lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,858 Posts
things never stay the same... change happens all the time, theres no way to stop it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,833 Posts
We're not winning in Iraq. There will be no democracy there, there will be no pro-American govt. there - unless it's a dictatorship; there will be no winning of hearts and minds; and there will be no way to neutralize Iran and N Korea as long as long as we are bogged down in nation building for a land full of savages who aren't worth one drop of American blood. And what the hell! The GOP had power for 12 years in the congress - and absolute power since Bush came into office - and they screwed up everything, and already Anne is writing off the Democratic leadership(although they probably will fail). Oh, and Anne forgot to mention the over 20,000 American wounded.
 

·
The man
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
We're not winning in Iraq. There will be no democracy there, there will be no pro-American govt. there - unless it's a dictatorship; there will be no winning of hearts and minds; and there will be no way to neutralize Iran and N Korea as long as long as we are bogged down in nation building for a land full of savages who aren't worth one drop of American blood. And what the hell! The GOP had power for 12 years in the congress - and absolute power since Bush came into office - and they screwed up everything, and already Anne is writing off the Democratic leadership(although they probably will fail). Oh, and Anne forgot to mention the over 20,000 American wounded.
I agree....She doesn't get it.

We can defend the country from here. Pull all the troops, Let them kill each other. Warn everyone that the next 911-style attack will bring death and destruction from above. When the next 911-style attack occurs, follow through on the warning with one highly engineered piece of military equipment.

Option #2:Go back to the way it used to be when the CIA used to "take care of things"

Either way, F%#$ the middle east and let them solve their own problems. I long for the day when alternative fuel sources make the need for oil obsolete. That's the same day the world should inform the middle east that food just went up to $1,000/barrel...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,643 Posts
How did we go from winning the war in Iraq to losing overnight?
When exactly was the war in Iraq being won?
[/quote]

Up to the point where Hussein was caught. After that it's all downhill.
[/quote]

well catching him was the easy part.

restoring order and keeping controll after the initial combat face is the hard i would say almost impossible task.

this is what they failed to acknowledge. and we are observing the result of a short thought through plan to "free" a people.
 

·
Cannonfruit!!!1!!1!11!
Joined
·
12,264 Posts
I will say this...we definitely freed them. Unfortunately, in allowing an almost anarchaic state, we also freed the beast within many of them, too.
 

·
Indianapolis Football
Joined
·
12,187 Posts
How did we go from winning the war in Iraq to losing overnight?
When exactly was the war in Iraq being won?
[/quote]

What are you talking about dude ? Did you not watch the news in May of 2003 ? We won the war long time ago !



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,692 Posts
How did we go from winning the war in Iraq to losing overnight?
When exactly was the war in Iraq being won?
[/quote]

Up to the point where Hussein was caught. After that it's all downhill.
[/quote]
The seeds of today's trouble were already planted before Saddam's capture: it started as soon as the troops went in without any plan how to deal with the power vaccuum that would arise as soon as the Coalition took charge in Iraq (which was scheduled to, and turned out to be swift). That's where the core of the Iraq disaster lies, and nowhere else.

As far as Coulter is concerned: she can suck on my nuts and choke on 'em...
 

·
Indianapolis Football
Joined
·
12,187 Posts
As far as Coulter is concerned: she can suck on my nuts and choke on 'em...


You don't realize that people like Coulter are almost singlehandedly responsible for alienating the independent and moderate voter base and forcing them to either vote Democrat or stay home on election day... I'd say her usefulness is highly underrated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,692 Posts
As far as Coulter is concerned: she can suck on my nuts and choke on 'em...


You don't realize that people like Coulter are almost singlehandedly responsible for alienating the independent and moderate voter base and forcing them to either vote Democrat or stay home on election day... I'd say her usefulness is highly underrated.
[/quote]
Maybe true, but she can still suck on my nuts and choke on 'em. She's a perfect example of how freedom of speech can be turned into something vile and hatebreeding - on par with ultra leftwing radicals, Islamofascists etc. And none of these people are part of a solution to our present-day problems: in fact, they are an integral part of the problems, and only turn the world more black and white, more polarized.

Btw: I think you're not giving Bush enough credit for the last election results
 

·
Indianapolis Football
Joined
·
12,187 Posts
As far as Coulter is concerned: she can suck on my nuts and choke on 'em...


You don't realize that people like Coulter are almost singlehandedly responsible for alienating the independent and moderate voter base and forcing them to either vote Democrat or stay home on election day... I'd say her usefulness is highly underrated.
[/quote]
Maybe true, but she can still suck on my nuts and choke on 'em. She's a perfect example of how freedom of speech can be turned into something vile and hatebreeding - on par with ultra leftwing radicals, Islamofascists etc. And none of these people are part of a solution to our present-day problems: in fact, they are an integral part of the problems, and only turn the world more black and white, more polarized.

Btw: I think you're not giving Bush enough credit for the last election results

[/quote]

I don't know man, the more I think about the more I think that everyone serves a useful purpose - the leftwing/rightwing radicals, the Islamofascists, the neo-cons, the communists, the gay evangelical crystal meth addicts, the mafia, the anarchists, everybody in the whole damn world... there is never going to be true peace on Earth, someone's rights will always be trampled on and that's just how it is because humans are not a peaceful species and tha'ts how life works. Not saying that you are wrong in your opposition to them either. Sometimes I just feel I am better off simply accepting that there is always going to be violence and injustice and people that cheer and encourage these acts as long as humans inhabit the planet and maybe we're better off blowing each other up sooner than later
OK, I am starting to get carried away here... OUT
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,643 Posts
jewels i actually think your on to something!!¨'

now lets steal some nukes!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,412 Posts
We're not winning in Iraq. There will be no democracy there, there will be no pro-American govt. there - unless it's a dictatorship; there will be no winning of hearts and minds; and there will be no way to neutralize Iran and N Korea as long as long as we are bogged down in nation building for a land full of savages who aren't worth one drop of American blood. And what the hell! The GOP had power for 12 years in the congress - and absolute power since Bush came into office - and they screwed up everything, and already Anne is writing off the Democratic leadership(although they probably will fail). Oh, and Anne forgot to mention the over 20,000 American wounded.
I agree....She doesn't get it.

We can defend the country from here. Pull all the troops, Let them kill each other. Warn everyone that the next 911-style attack will bring death and destruction from above. When the next 911-style attack occurs, follow through on the warning with one highly engineered piece of military equipment.

Option #2:Go back to the way it used to be when the CIA used to "take care of things"

Either way, F%#$ the middle east and let them solve their own problems. I long for the day when alternative fuel sources make the need for oil obsolete. That's the same day the world should inform the middle east that food just went up to $1,000/barrel...
[/quote]

whoa baby!!! that's what im talking about!!! unfortunately, the day we would be non-dependant on oil, would be now, if not for reagan. carter had us set up for alternative energy, and reagan pulled it all...but i think we need government subsidising on these solar panels...look at what happened with HDTV's, its the same concept. when they first came out, they were 7,000 dollars for a 42" TV, then, they caught on pretty good, so investers figured hey, this is a good product, lets produce this, prices fell as production grew. now, the government has mandated that no more analog broadcast will be allowed, so all those old "leaded" TV sets are out, and will be un-usable by 2009...now HD sets are being mass produced and can be found for less than 1/10th of what they used to cost. same thing with solar panels. currently they're like 10,000 dollars or more. but if the government mandated that every house in america is at least 50% energy independant, then investors would jump on that bandwagon, invest in factories and buildings to build these panels for cheaper, mass produce them...etc...

oh...and anne coulter is a stupid douche bag...(sorry, i had to say it!)
 

·
The man
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
We're not winning in Iraq. There will be no democracy there, there will be no pro-American govt. there - unless it's a dictatorship; there will be no winning of hearts and minds; and there will be no way to neutralize Iran and N Korea as long as long as we are bogged down in nation building for a land full of savages who aren't worth one drop of American blood. And what the hell! The GOP had power for 12 years in the congress - and absolute power since Bush came into office - and they screwed up everything, and already Anne is writing off the Democratic leadership(although they probably will fail). Oh, and Anne forgot to mention the over 20,000 American wounded.
I agree....She doesn't get it.

We can defend the country from here. Pull all the troops, Let them kill each other. Warn everyone that the next 911-style attack will bring death and destruction from above. When the next 911-style attack occurs, follow through on the warning with one highly engineered piece of military equipment.

Option #2:Go back to the way it used to be when the CIA used to "take care of things"

Either way, F%#$ the middle east and let them solve their own problems. I long for the day when alternative fuel sources make the need for oil obsolete. That's the same day the world should inform the middle east that food just went up to $1,000/barrel...
[/quote]

whoa baby!!! that's what im talking about!!! unfortunately, the day we would be non-dependant on oil, would be now, if not for reagan. carter had us set up for alternative energy, and reagan pulled it all...but i think we need government subsidising on these solar panels...look at what happened with HDTV's, its the same concept. when they first came out, they were 7,000 dollars for a 42" TV, then, they caught on pretty good, so investers figured hey, this is a good product, lets produce this, prices fell as production grew. now, the government has mandated that no more analog broadcast will be allowed, so all those old "leaded" TV sets are out, and will be un-usable by 2009...now HD sets are being mass produced and can be found for less than 1/10th of what they used to cost. same thing with solar panels. currently they're like 10,000 dollars or more. but if the government mandated that every house in america is at least 50% energy independant, then investors would jump on that bandwagon, invest in factories and buildings to build these panels for cheaper, mass produce them...etc...
oh...and anne coulter is a stupid douche bag...(sorry, i had to say it!) [/quote]

I strongly disagree with the government subsidizing anything but I think your point about the private sector investing in and improving the technology for mass production is a good one.

Jimmuh Carter is without a doubt the most failed and impotent president this country has ever seen. I don't think you want to engage in a review of his accomplishments....but we can if you want to...

As for Manne Coulter, your just upset that she has a bigger one than you do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,959 Posts
As far as Coulter is concerned: she can suck on my nuts and choke on 'em...
um...


You do know that's a man....


I agree that the CIA needs to do what it used to do. It may seem unethical, but the millions that WONT die might argue that it's actually quite ethical...

Alternative energy needs to make some big jumps.
 

·
The man
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
As far as Coulter is concerned: she can suck on my nuts and choke on 'em...


You don't realize that people like Coulter are almost singlehandedly responsible for alienating the independent and moderate voter base and forcing them to either vote Democrat or stay home on election day... I'd say her usefulness is highly underrated.
[/quote]
Maybe true, but she can still suck on my nuts and choke on 'em. She's a perfect example of how freedom of speech can be turned into something vile and hatebreeding - on par with ultra leftwing radicals, Islamofascists etc. And none of these people are part of a solution to our present-day problems: in fact, they are an integral part of the problems, and only turn the world more black and white, more polarized.

Btw: I think you're not giving Bush enough credit for the last election results
[/quote]

Judazzz,

I don't think in any of our previous conversations I have ever asked you what ideas you have kicked around in your head about possible solutions to the problem of islamo-fascism around the world. Do you see it as an immanent threat worthy of a response/defense of some kind or do you believe that it is much ado about nothing? WWJD?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,833 Posts
The seeds of today's trouble were already planted before Saddam's capture: it started as soon as the troops went in without any plan how to deal with the power vaccuum that would arise as soon as the Coalition took charge in Iraq (which was scheduled to, and turned out to be swift). That's where the core of the Iraq disaster lies, and nowhere else.
I can't believe that the Neocons didn't research the history of the Britsih experience in Iraq.

In World War I, it took British military forces three years to move from Basra to Baghdad. Contrary to expectations, the troops were not welcomed as liberators. Their arrival in Baghdad was marked by indifference, tribal unrest, and economic turmoil.

During the first years of occupation, British forces and supplies were stretched thin as the empire fought multiple fronts in the world war. They imposed forced labor on tens of thousands of Iraqi subjects and failed to provide food to hungry villages. The British removed the Ottoman yoke, but they replaced it with their own. This imperial arrogance only further cultivated simmering anti-Western sentiment among various groups in the newly formed country of Iraq.

The process of governing the new territory was further complicated by differing opinions in the British government about objectives and methods. Those differences alienated prospective Iraqi leaders and hindered the development of effective political systems. The British military initially filled the void of indecision about how to govern the new territory until, ultimately, the British India Office took on the administration of Iraq. Under a League of Nations mandate that began in 1920, Britain began to install the formal institutions of democracy in the form of a constitutional monarchy, but these trappings lacked democratic content. In place of a genuine system of governance, the British were implementing an inflexible mechanism of control with few democratic roots.

Beware Unintended Consequences and Excessive Pride

Consistent with the rhetoric of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson about independence for the ex-Ottoman lands, the British during World War I had portrayed themselves as the liberators of Iraq, promising to replace Ottoman rule with independence. When Britain did not quickly grant independence to Iraq, opting instead for the League of Nations mandate, initial Iraqi indifference to British rule turned into active and often violent opposition, fueled by nationalism and hostility to non-Muslim governance. In 1920, the British faced a great revolt, suppressed at considerable cost, and anti-British sentiment continued throughout the long British involvement in Iraq. Accordingly, the constitutional monarchy established by the British never achieved the legitimacy needed to ensure long-term survival; it was ultimately swept away by a nationalist coup in 1958.

Under the mandate, a new Iraqi army was formed. The British kept it small, but paid little attention to the fiercely nationalist and anti-British tone being inculcated into the new officer corps. After Iraq's constitutional monarchy gained independence in 1932, the military soon asserted itself. Beginning with a 1936 coup, just three years after the death of King Faysal, Iraqi military forces began to assert control over the structures of government. Military officers comprised at least three quarters of the Iraqi parliament during this period and became the gatekeepers to power. In 1941, when Britain was at its lowest point in World War II, the Iraqi army surrounded a vital British air base in Iraq, and Britain had to reoccupy the country.
http://www.ciaonet.org/pbei/winep/policy_2003/2003_728.html
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top