Extremists 1, Democracy 0

December 27, 2007
8:04 AM CST

I see that former PakiPM Benazir Bhutto has just been assassinated.

Benazir Bhutto, the Pakistani opposition leader and former Prime Minister, died today after a suicide bomber detonated his explosives during a political rally. About 20 people were killed in the attack.

Ms Bhutto had been addressing crowds at the garrison city of Rawalpindi ahead of Pakistan’s general election next month. She was taken to Rawalpindi General Hospital but could not be saved.

Wasif Ali Khan, a member of her Pakistan People’s Party, said that she was pronounced dead at 6.16pm local time (13.16 GMT).

Rehman Malik, a security adviser for the party, suggested that the killer had opened fire as she left the rally, hitting her in the neck and chest, before blowing himself up.

It’s going to be SHTF Time in Pakistan now.

Damn. And I always thought she was a total hottie, too. Here’s a pic taken of her outside the stupid Muslim tent-clothing, when she was still a student at Harvard:

R.I.P.

Comments

Bottom of Comments | Original Post

And so goes the last hope of any form of democracy in Pakistan. Which doesn’t want it in the first place. Let them all go to hell!

Author ID: 7560 | 12/27/2007 08:27 AM CST | #108284


Damn!

A country needs multiple leaders to represent the various political groups.  Otherwise, you can never develop a modern representative democracy.  All you get is the typical middle eastern tyranny.

Author ID: 566 | 12/27/2007 08:37 AM CST | #108286


We can’t.

Pakistan has nuclear weapons and a powerful Islamic fundamentalist presence.  If THEY get their hands on the nukes, all Hell breaks loose.  It will be a race between the U.S. and India to destroy the Pakistani nuclear armory...and I would not rule out the use of atomic weapons to make certain we wipe them out.

Very bad situation.

Author ID: 200 | 12/27/2007 08:38 AM CST | #108287


I have mixed feelings about her death.

On one hand she was a corrupt politician, and on the other she was a person…

I also dont think she would have been a strong enough leader to hold the islamofascists in line.  So in a way her death may actually be a loss for the extremists.

Author ID: 10589 | 12/27/2007 08:48 AM CST | #108290


So our choice is a barely cooperative thug like Musharraf, or the so-called total fundamentalist whackjpbs, and weapons of mass destruction.

Somehow, an eerily similar precedent comes to mind.

Let’s save time, and start carpet-bombing the presidential palace now.

Author ID: 9097 | 12/27/2007 08:51 AM CST | #108292


It took way more than one person to form our republic.

Author ID: 8945 | 12/27/2007 08:53 AM CST | #108293


Another action that proves “Islam is Evil”.

Author ID: 8785 | 12/27/2007 09:06 AM CST | #108297


It’s fascinating that some other bloggers can’t figure out whether it was Islamist extremists or supporters of Musharraf.  When did Musharraf’s supporters start blowing themselves up?

Author ID: 9014 | 12/27/2007 09:12 AM CST | #108299


No dot?

Author ID: 9349 | 12/27/2007 09:15 AM CST | #108301


Well, there you go. A culture that says any woman who isn’t stored as property, isn’t wrapped in a portable tent, and isn’t kept silent should be killed has succeeded again. What did anyone expect?

I got it. I understand. They hate us and are willing to kill us to impose their belief system on the survivors. Surrendering means seeing our remaining freedom swept away.

What I still fail to understand is how come women, religious minorities, and gays haven’t banded together to demand that the remaining effective military power in the world be put to use to stop this insanity.

Author ID: 1632 | 12/27/2007 09:42 AM CST | #108308


She was a piece of shit. I realize that’s harsh sounding now that she’s been murdered, but let’s be straightforward about it. She was a corrupt PM when she was in office, and wasn’t an “exile” as the media continue to like to claim, but a criminal who fled arrest. She helped the islamist scum gain power (and did nothing to try to hold the Russians at least morally accountable for murdering General Zia), she did nothing to help her country and helped Afghanistan turn to shit. She was weak, she was a socialist twit, and she should have been in jail.

The media are now insisting on calling her “the popular...” but that is a lie. The last polling I saw showed her at 24%. If that’s popular, what are the media-modified-for-damage ratings of Bush, then?

Author ID: 8165 | 12/27/2007 09:43 AM CST | #108309


The reason women, religious minorities, and gays don’t speak out about this stuff is that here in the US, very few minorities have never known a moment of real oppression (those that have are entering the later stages of life and inside 30 years even they will be gone).  Thus they don’t understand what real oppression looks like and in their zeal to be tolerant and open minded, they’ll excuse any act of oppression (which is what this assassination is) as a simple cultural difference that we must respect.

Any religion that would cover up such a beautiful woman cannot simultaneously claim to revere the creation their deity has created.  That Islam treats its women so badly proves to me that it is not a religion whose adherents celebrate their faith.  It is a religion where one’s faith is a burden which must be borne lest a vengeful god destroy them utterly.  A religion based on a tyrannical god is unlikely to yield a people who cherish freedom.

I know nothing about this woman.  What I do know is that this is how politics is played out in the Muslim world.  Not at the ballot box, but with the bomb and bullet.  If this part of the world is to be brought out of the dark ages, an example must be set for them to show them how it is done.  Iraq might be that example someday, but until the average people of the middle east decide to throw off the shackles of their religious tyranny, attempts at democracy in that region will fail.

Author ID: 424 | 12/27/2007 10:27 AM CST | #108312


that should be “ever known a moment of real oppression”

Author ID: 424 | 12/27/2007 10:28 AM CST | #108313


TraitorH,

While you may be correct, it’s important to know that a.) Benazir was never formally arrested for corruption, that b.) she fled because she wasn’t at all sure she would get a fair trial, and c.) her husband, who WAS a corrupt asshole, was going to drag her down with him.

Enough doubt swirls around that whole corruption thing to make us at least think twice before condemning her as harshly as you did.

All that said, her assassination is deplorable and disgusting —just as the same would be true if Hillary Clinton, (another person suspected, but never convicted, of corruption) were to be assassinated in like fashion.

If she was that bad a person, she would (or should) have been rejected by voters. Her political platform was all about modernizing Paki society and opening it up, and I suspect it was THAT which led to her killing.

0 Author ID: 1 | 12/27/2007 10:47 AM CST | #108315


Her treatment of Afghanistan and the Taliban which is claimed to have enabled the Taliban to export terror occured in the early 90’s when really no one knew the Taliban would be what it became.  She fled in 1996 and the Taliban really showed its true colors in 1998-9.

In addition, she spoke out about terrorism far more than Musharraf or the Sharia-loving third candidate in Pakistan.

Things will get much worses before they get better, and I don’t mean just in Pakistan where the confusion and turmoil helps the brownshirts Islamofascists.

Author ID: 2303 | 12/27/2007 12:13 PM CST | #108318


I’m not quite sure I understand the caterwauling about “democracy” in Pakistan.  Inevitably, democracy will usher in the likes of the Taliban, Hamas or Hezbollah.  We need stability in the region and democracy ain’t the way to get it.  Democracy has been a disaster in Lebannon, in Iran, in Venezuela etc. etc. etc.  These Islamic animals guided by their Satanic Koran cannot become part of any civilized society until and unless they abandon the Koran. 

Ultimately, there is no solution other than sequestration and isolation of the offending organism.  We aren’t quite ready for that solution and can only hope that when we are it will not be too late.

Author ID: 10776 | 12/27/2007 12:28 PM CST | #108320


When one flees arrest, it’s hard to arrest you. Especially when you’re an international leftist celebrity for being wrong about so much.

I am being hard on her, and perhaps unduly so to a certain extent. The way the media have been promoting her for so long for no legitimate reason has irked me quite a bit. I have little patience and even less respect for socialists, no matter who they are. Adults know that violence against the innocent is wrong. Socialists believe themselves to be above right and wrong.

It was 1996 when the Taliban took over, and their opponents had been asking the U.S. and other backers for help for quite a while. The Taliban were just like al Qaeda in Iraq has been, murdering people to intimidate their opposition and to gain power. The Taliban succeeded in doing so because no significant force existed to oppose them.

Further, I think it entirely plausible that Bhutto’s foisting herself upon her nation further radicalized their intel service and others, and she did nothing to help the better forces in Afghanistan, nor did she ask the Traitor to help them, which would have been no more difficult than making a number of private phone calls. I don’t know that it would have made a difference, since Boy Clinton was trying to make deals with the Taliban including for an oil pipeline. Of course, I suppose it’s even possible she did that and because of the conspiracy among leftist criminals she simply wouldn’t say anything about Clinton’s failures. As one glaring and still relevant example, Tony Blair never mentioned in public the fact that Britain quit sharing intelligence with the U.S. during the Clinton Treason because they learned it was ending up in China’s hands. Imagine if any but a leftist puke had done that. Do you think you wouldn’t hear about it weekly until the end of time? Hell, the major networks were still repeating Democrat talking points about the Roosevelt forefather Herbert Hoover in the early 1990’s.

Author ID: 8165 | 12/27/2007 12:47 PM CST | #108323


And FYI, Clinton isn’t merely suspected. We have full proof and also a sort of conviction. We have sworn statements from at least one uniformed Secret Service member about her taking envelopes of cash from Chinese officers in the White House. We also have the ~$500 million fine she was assessed for violating openness in government laws with her illegal Healthcare Task Force. Illegal because it met in secret and she wasn’t a member of the administration, and though uncharged it also violated the Bobby Kennedy law which keeps close relatives of the president from serving in significant positions. And then there’s the anti-deficiency law…

Oh, and by the way, guess who had to pay that fine? That’s right, US. The American taxpayers. That is an obscenity.

Author ID: 8165 | 12/27/2007 12:55 PM CST | #108324


CM’s got it right. Democracy only works with an educated and responsible electorate. Hell, it works only passably well here in the good ol’ USA. Musharref is a weak military dictator caught between the Islamofascists and socialists. Add the nuclear capability the Pakis idiotically developed and a powerful and hostile Hindu state with ongoing border disputes, and it’s very hard to see a happy ending. We’ve dumped $10 billion in aid into this shithole and what did we get? They won’t even go after bin Ladin, or let us do it.

Author ID: 7827 | 12/27/2007 01:06 PM CST | #108326


SAVAGES !  BLOODY SAVAGES !

Author ID: 9281 | 12/27/2007 01:39 PM CST | #108328


Most Americans live in a world of Law and Order. We insist on it and depend on it and 82% of Americans take it for granted. Another 10% Kept America safe or have volunteered for Military Service to go anywhere to insure it. The rest are criminals that rely on their opportunities to rob, rape, pillage and use violence or the threat of it to achieve success here without a care or a moral issue getting in the way.

Third world countries have more to fear and far less to defend. Pakistan is an Islamic State, has never eliminated Islamic radicals, has been a safe haven for murdering punks and thugs for decades and has been rewarded in multiple millions of US taxpayer $$$$$$$$$ for a long time.

Aside from the fact that they have a nuclear arsenal and Chinese delivery devices, what is not to like there?

Being dirt poor and desperate for your next meal makes terrorism that is funded by Middle Eastern Oil rich Muslim nations fairly attractive. I have spent 12 years of my Military Career in the Middle East.

By Your Civilized standards they are All Savages. By my standards, they are all a threat to Western Civilization and very capable of destroying it. You cannot negotiate with those bloody bastards. They must be eliminated and genocide be damned. They are all vermin and never wished a one of you well.

Just my take on it.

Author ID: 9598 | 12/27/2007 02:13 PM CST | #108332


She was shot in the neck and chest first according to the latest reports. Then blown up.

Author ID: 10530 | 12/27/2007 03:18 PM CST | #108335


Pakistan: Rubble makes no trouble.

Author ID: 9086 | 12/27/2007 03:54 PM CST | #108338


They must see the light! Send them a bunch of cans of sunshine. All of that scum needs to die. There seems to be no way to get the message across other than this. Yes, there are innocents. And I’m very sorry to say that if there aren’t enough of them to free the nation, they must ALL die. God will sort them out.

Author ID: 6430 | 12/27/2007 04:25 PM CST | #108342


Pretty soon it will be time to fire up the B-52s......

Author ID: 7763 | 12/27/2007 05:07 PM CST | #108346


Musharraf has the same problem with his ISI that GWB has with our CIA: they are an unaccountable shadow government working against him from within. The ISI has known links with AQ, and the smart money says they helped the killer get thru.

At least our CIA hasn’t formed open alliances with AQ (we hope).

Author ID: 6542 | 12/27/2007 05:20 PM CST | #108348


Musharrif has his problems with Osama bin Laden and Al Quaida;
Bush has his problems with Dick Cheney and Haliburton;
Well, when you lie down with dogs, you gotta accept the damn fleas!

Dubya has screwed up this country six ways from Sunday, but at least he hasn’t let terrorists ACTIVELY take over running it (I don’t THINK). Musharrif HAS done that with Pakistan and Al Quaida, and it is going to be his undoing. Unfortunately, it has gotten ex-PM Bhutto - yeah, a socialist, but one that also had enough common sense (usually) to come in out of the rain - murdered along the way - by those same terrorists!

I hate to say it, but it just MIGHT be time to warm up the BUFFs - and BONEs, and BEAKs. and anything ELSE we have sitting around, before the Paks get arund to unleashing their inventory at anyone and everyone.
Happy New Year? I sincerely hope we get one.

Author ID: 8889 | 12/27/2007 05:56 PM CST | #108353


Bush has his problems with Dick Cheney and Haliburton;

Sure your homepage isn’t Daily Kos?

And GWB hasn’t been perfect by any means.... but he’s done a pretty good job in the face of the Disloyal Opposition.

Author ID: 6542 | 12/27/2007 06:14 PM CST | #108355


Good or bad, she was a woman in a Moslem country who did not cover her face and wore lipstick.  That she lived this long before one of the scum killed her is amazing.

As for war.  When we bombed German and Japanese cities, we killed many innocent people, maybe millions of them.  That was how it had to be, to defeat their rulers and preserve civilization.  That’s why they call it war.  And in this case, the innocents in question were mostly dancing in the streets on 9-11 so how are they innocent?

We need leaders who have the guts to get it done and we don’t have them.  And we won’t have them so long as either the democrats or republicans hold power in Washington.

And we need a govt. that is not infested with traitors in many of its branches.  If the CIA has formed an alliance with AQ.  I’ll bet you the State Department was already there far ahead of them and giving Bin Laden a blowjob when the CIA walked through the door.

I understand that back in 73, when the Soviets were shoving weapons and ammo off their ships and onto Egypt’s docks with bulldozers.  And our good old freedom loving govt. was not helping Israel.  The Israelis stated in plain language that if they went down, they were holding some Mirage jets in reserve, armed with nukes and fuel tanks.... to give them the range to make a one way trip to Moscow to make their enemies pay the price.

Shortly after they made this promise, the US suddenly started throwing free weapons and ammo to the Israelis and has supported their defenses ever since.  Because that wasn’t a threat, it was a promise.

We have no leader with the guts to make such a promise with regards to nuking Mecca.

We need someone who likes John Wayne’s line from a movie.  I promise, you’re going to die.  I might get shot, he might get shot, who knows what will happen and I won’t care who’s fault it is.  Because whatever else happens, you’re going to die.

Bush said he was that guy.  He said borders don’t mean shit to him, he’s going hunting.  But US troops have not entered Pakistan and Bin Laden yet lives, in safety.

And we have zero prospects from either party of getting a leader who is capable of doing any better than Bush short of a revolution.  And frankly I don’t see that happening any time soon either.

Author ID: 8495 | 12/27/2007 06:19 PM CST | #108356


Two words sprung to mind when I heard the news: Archduke Ferdinand.

Let’s hope the ramifications are less severe.

Author ID: 9498 | 12/27/2007 06:34 PM CST | #108358


Seriously, SDN. Maybe that name “Mad” isn’t merely a joke.

Bush has done a number of things I disgreed with, but then I wasn’t a supporter of his in 2000 until he was the least dangerous option remaining. I wanted Keyes (thank God I didn’t get my way, as he showed himself honorless in his 2006 “I’m a blacktivist just like Obama and Sharpton!” Senate run) and then Forbes. I yelled at the wimp on my TV set during the 2000 debate where he came out in support of Algore’s socialized drugs for Mediscare recipients plan. And after promising to oppose the Feingold-Delahunt-McCain speech censorship bill, he signed it in 2002. And yes, he has been too sensitive to the feelings of various people, including the seditious courts and treasonous opposition. Recall his inviting the murdering traitor “Tedward” M. Kennedy to the White House to watch a dishonest movie making his moronic dead brother out to look like he wasn’t a coward and the sole cause of the missiles of August, which he decided to mention in October with the press helping hide the truth.

But everything significant that’s wrong today was worse when he entered office, and rapidly worsening. He entered office telling his staff he wanted to quit dicking around with al Qaeda and kill them. He had practically no air transport for rapid deployment thanks to the Traitor. He had a small and morally weakened Army again thanks to the Traitor. He had a trillion dollar deficit, and 2 wars coming. And he had Democrats stealing the Senate, after the entire party openly tried to steal the 2000 election, and then had the balls to try to claim their victims were the ones who stole the election.

Bush has been weak, no doubt. But so is every pol. We can’t expect much from a person who puts himself in the public square for popular support. It is the job of the citizens to hold people accountable. Both Clintons walk the streets alive. That means there is no crime you can’t get away with provided you’re the media’s favored. That has to be ended.

And as I’ve said before, the entire purpose of government is to destroy the independent mind. That is why government schools were started. That is what has to be ended before our liberty is restored, let alone safe.

Author ID: 8165 | 12/27/2007 06:40 PM CST | #108359


Thanks for the pic without the tent, I always thought she was a beauty.  Nice to see the rest was as pleasant as her face.

However she was as a politician, she had one plus in my book: pissing off the Fundie Mooslimbs by challenging them.  Anyone that does that can’t be all bad.  Damned dangerous game to play, though....

And would somebody please tell me what’s wrong with people who think just because somebody was decended from or worse married to a pol they liked that that person is also qualified for the same post?  Bhutto, Aquino, Clinton, and who was that woman who tried to take her husband’s place on the ballot when he died before the election.... can’t remember.... it was a state level position.... 2004....

All of these women trying to step into their husbands or father’s jobs is silly enough, but the fact that they are so frequently successful at it sickens me.  Why would people vote only for the same name?

Author ID: 8605 | 12/27/2007 07:41 PM CST | #108361


There was the governor in 2000 who died in a plane crash, and was running against John Ashcroft for his Senate seat. That election was won by Ashcroft, and then a Democrat-appointed judge re-opened the polls in the most Democrat-dominated part of St. Louis and suddenly the dead governor’s wife “won”. Happens a lot, though. Heck, I think Paul Tsongas’s widow is another drone in the House.

Thinking about the main subject some more, I believe I was wrong about Bhutto’s poll ratings. I think she was at 28%, while Musharraf was the one at 24%.

It may be fun to talk about bombing them, but they’re no more than simple people who don’t hear much truth. Sort of like Americans and Europeans in that latter, except we have means of finding it that they lack. Eventually we’ll quit seeking out those means, as that’s the plan of the left, and their control of education and religion (in government schools, as all schooling has a religious component whether openly admitted or not) means they are removing the means of independent thought from their charges. Leftism is always totalitarian, because it is a substitute religion, with government as their god.

Back not so long ago, Americans and Pakistanis got along well. All sorts of things went into screwing that up, and we’re not entirely responsible for it on our own, though we share a great deal of blame in debasing the dollar in the 1960’s and 1970’s which strengthened Saudi Arabia, allowing them to fund their wacko-factory schools for boys only, and in bad policies every time a leftist gains power (or someone too weak to defeat the State Dept. bureaucracy), and also in the purposeful policies of Democrat-controlled Congresses. But like all complicated stories where the bad guy is the real enemy America faces, it won’t be told.

Author ID: 8165 | 12/27/2007 09:04 PM CST | #108363


Kind of reminds me of how Indira Gandhi died.  And Rajiv Gandhi.  Not to mention Mohandas. 

Personally, if I lived in the Subcontinent, I’d stay far away from politics in favor of something less dangerous---like fighting rogue elephants with wet noodles.  And less disgraceful---like being a geek in a carnival. 

‘Tis a pity, though...she looks eminently yummy.

Author ID: 7388 | 12/27/2007 11:58 PM CST | #108368


Since she was the one running Pakistan when they recognized the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan, I have a hard time feeling sorry for her.  And, I suspect that there are a lot of Afghans (including probably most of the women) who share that sentiment.  Much has been made of her having opposed the militant islamists, but that was strictly a recent thing, probably done to curry favor with the west.

Author ID: 524 | 12/28/2007 12:36 AM CST | #108369


Johnnyreb: .......And our good old freedom loving govt. was not helping Israel........

That is simply not true.  We helped Israel in 1973 as much as we could, considering the Democrats in Congress were hot after Nixon due to Watergate.  I was stationed in Europe (NATO) at the time and watched the process unfold.

</topic derail>

Author ID: 40 | 12/28/2007 03:47 AM CST | #108371


TH -

Yep, “Mad” IS much more than a joke!

I’m MAD about what the damn DemCong LibTards have done to this country;
I’m MAD about what that jackass Dubya has done to this country, under the disguise of hunting down a satanic animal (ObL) and his insane band of cretins (AQ);
I’m MAD AS HELL about what is GOING to happen to this country that I hung my VOLUNTEER ASS OUT ON THE LINE FOR in 1971, when my Draft Lottery # in 1970 was 321, if that BITCH Hildemort gets elected in 2008!

I didn’t trust Dubya back when his sorry ass was hanging around (and in the middle of) the Savings & Loan scandals in TX back in the 80’s, while his Daddy was screaming at Reagan in the Cabinet meetings about how Israel was a bunch of bad boys for blasting the Iraqi reactor at Osirak. I didn’t trust Dubya in 2000 when he ran against Dole in the primaries, nor against Fat Al in the general (YES, all RIGHT, I admit it; okay? Fine; shoot me NEXT WEEK). I didn’t trust Dubya in 2004 - McCain in the primary, and (God help me) Kerry - because I WILL NEVER TRUST THAT LYING BASTARD DUBYA!!!
BUT: I WOULD vote for DUBYA before I’d vote for Hillary Rodham AntiChrist Clinton.

Now; if that pisses you off THAT BADLY, TH, check with Kim; he has my e-mail address. And my home address, if you absolutely MUST get personal.
But I really don’t think we should take things that far; this is SUPPOSED to be a discussion between adults.

Author ID: 8889 | 12/28/2007 04:26 AM CST | #108373


TH said some true stuff back at #32, and what Mad Yank just said in #38. But W is one whole hell of a lot better than what we WOULD have had in either of the elections that were mentioned, 00 & 04. I must say that I am sick to absolute f&#*ing death of the way this country has been going down the tubes. It’s still a hell of a lot better than anywhere else on earth. DAMNIT people, VOTE! Research (we have a lot of good right wing blogs), and get off your ass in the primaries. Don’t wait for the general, make sure we have a decent candidate! FRED! for example. No waffling, very consistent, conservative federalist. Spread the word, and do not let the socialist pig-f&#*ing slimeball Demoncraps retain power of any form. Get them the hell out of any form of office that presents the option! VOTE!!!!!

Author ID: 6430 | 12/28/2007 05:09 AM CST | #108374


Had Bush lost in ‘00 the Republican party and conservative movement would be in better shape than it is today.  Republicans would have acted, as they should (!!), as an opposition party instead of the party of perks and giveaways.  Bush has forsworn is duty to protect our borders thereby abdicating his most sacred responsibility, namely to protect and defend the United States.  Our porous borders will almost certainly be the source of our next terrorist attack.

He is willing to sacrifice the lives of our men in arms on the altar of his grandiose messianic scheme to democratize the Middle East and yet unwilling to do HIS part in defending our nation.  Bush is either an ignoramus, a coward or both.

Bush has done incalculable harm to the Conservative movement in the USA and it will take at least another election cycle to repair the damage assuming there are enough conservatives left after flooding the nation with third world immigrants both legal and illegal who will likely never vote for anything other than a government handout.

I never thought I’d say this, but Carter is no longer the worse president in US history.  That accolade now belongs to El Presidente Jorge Bush.  His presidency has been a collossal failure.

Author ID: 10776 | 12/28/2007 09:11 AM CST | #108388


Considering the options were to:

1.  Nuke the Middle East and murder billions of innocents
2.  Reform the governments of the Middle East and eradicate the current terrorists and the environment where they are created

I think choosing Door #2 was the only sane option.

If people don’t get what the WoT is and its larger purpose of preventing future generations from having to fight a never ending war with Islamic radicals, after having it explained to them for the past 5 years, there’s no hope they’ll ever get it.

The War on Terror INCLUDES reforming the Middle East.  That’s what we signed on to do, and what we’ll continue to do until it is done.

0 Author ID: 2 | 12/28/2007 09:24 AM CST | #108389


Good answer Connie. CM, I tend to think the border thing you speak of, while correct to a (apparently large) point, is not exactly what it seems to be somehow. Yes, it appears to be a total disregard for security. Have we been blown up by islamic infiltrators that look so much like Mexicans that are smuggled across by the coyotes? Or, is it an intel thing? Looks terrible, don’t it? Bad enough to piss off the American people to the point where they’ll elect a hard border security POTUS and Congress who will then follow all the carefully tracked illegals and jihadis who’ve actually been tracked ever since they came across? Thereby putting a decent conservative government in place because America was so pissed off at an insecure “conservative liberal” and is fed up with the left wing dominance in DC?

Author ID: 6430 | 12/28/2007 10:06 AM CST | #108399


I think choosing Door #2 was the only sane option.

It is.

What I am concerned about is what we do if the electorate eventually decides the ME is beyond reform- and it might be.

Some of the commenters above are ready to warm up the BUFFs. Some of it is hyperbole, but I suspect a few are serious. Every time the jihadis pull off a successful attack, their numbers will grow.

Bush knows this. That is the future he is quite literally sparing no expense to avert, and it is big part of the reason I still have great respect for the man, despite all the mistakes he’s made.

Author ID: 353 | 12/28/2007 12:56 PM CST | #108431


All of the terrorists who have smuggled into the country have used our Northern border, not the Southern one.

That doesn’t mean that some future terrorist might be caught who came in through the porous Mexican border, but so far, the terrorists are using the Canadian route.

0 Author ID: 2 | 12/28/2007 01:23 PM CST | #108433


Considering the options were to:

1.  Nuke the Middle East and murder billions of innocents
2.  Reform the governments of the Middle East and eradicate the current terrorists and the environment where they are created

Uh, not quite.  No one, and I mean no credible person is recommending the first. 

The second is a fools errand.  First of all, what is meant by reforming their governments?  The governments of the Middle East cannot possibly be “reformed” when at their very core is the hate manual called the Koran.  The USA has codified the establishment of a theocracy in Afghanistan and Iraq in contravention of our own sacred constitutional principles. 

If we wanted to “reform their governments” it would require a total military defeat of all opposing factions.  Only then, as in Japan and Germany, could the reconstruction begin and only after we destroyed their fundamental belief system - Islam.  We are unwilling to commit to fight such a war.

Any Islamic nation will insist on a theocracy - that is what democracy will usher in - like it or not.  We have failed to acknowledge certain truths about Islam and what can and cannot be achieved.  Our options include declaring that ANY threat to the strategic interests of the USA will be dealt with forcefully and the threat will be removed.  Going into Iraq may have been justified, but staying there is just plain foolish in the extreme.

If our interests are not directly threatened then we should leave them to their own wicked devices.  One of our options that we have not explored is to develop our own energy resources which we have repeatedly refused to do.  Our presence in Iraq will not alter the long term geopolitical realities of the Middle East which are immutably tied to Islam.

If people don’t get what the WoT is and its larger purpose of preventing future generations from having to fight a never ending war with Islamic radicals, after having it explained to them for the past 5 years, there’s no hope they’ll ever get it.

The War on Terror INCLUDES reforming the Middle East.  That’s what we signed on to do, and what we’ll continue to do until it is done.

Reform of the Middle East is impossible under the current circumstances and I would suggest that anyone who thinks otherwise does not understand Islam or its designs.  Future generations will be fighting a never ending war with Islamic radicals as long as this supremacist evil ideology exists.  The only way it will end is if the West has the civilizational confidence to so declare and then act accordingly by destroying Islam in its midsts and isolating it and or destroying it when this is impossible.

Author ID: 10776 | 12/28/2007 01:32 PM CST | #108434


The only way it will end is if the West has the civilizational confidence to so declare and then act accordingly by destroying Islam in its midsts and isolating it and or destroying it when this is impossible.

So you do believe that #1 is the viable option, because you cannot eradicate a religion.

The Middle East is being reformed.  We are winning in Iraq.  They do have a secular government. 

Everything you said was said about Germany… and then Japan.

0 Author ID: 2 | 12/28/2007 01:39 PM CST | #108435


We can isolate ourselves by sequestering the animals in the Middle East and Indonesia.  Deal with them at arms length.  Outlaw Islam here in the USA.  And yes, you can eradicate a religion - it’s actually not nearly as difficult as you may think.  Just ask the Muslim barbarians. 

The Middle East is “being reformed”?  Excuse me, but what planet are you living on? 

We are “winning in Iraq?” Just what IS winning?  The institution of democracy?  That will give up an Islamic government.  Stability?  That will only be achieved in the Middle East at the point of a sword.  Our brave soldiers WON their victory years ago.  Their current role, winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqis, is being done by sacrificing their lives for an unachievable goal with outrageously foolish rules of engagement.

Everything I said was said about Germany and then Japan - correct!  But we DESTROYED them before they were willing to reform.  We are unwilling to do the same in Iraq and therefore we should get the hell out.  Fighting a “war” this way only demoralizes our troops and destroys morale, as it is, on the home front.

Author ID: 10776 | 12/28/2007 04:58 PM CST | #108455


The only long VIABLE long term solution is to integrate a secular Middle East into the global economy - and not just the oil market. The countries that have market based economies in the ME do just fine when they are not fucked with - just look at how Lebanon operated for decades before the Syrians/PLO fucked it all up.

Sure we can fire up the B-52s (which should happen in some cases), but leaving the ENTIRE muslim world smoking ruins from nuking them, regardless of their threats, is bad policy. I don’t want to be associated with it. During my years of travels I have found many good people from all the usual named shit holes - like Iran, Iraq, Syria etc.

Now once the first nuke hits the US, and we trace it back to the sponsors, Fire them big 8-engined birds of fury up…

Author ID: 7763 | 12/28/2007 09:24 PM CST | #108477