Wasting Time With Alex

Friday, January 25, 2008

Saddam lied & people died?

Saddam lied & people died?

See BS has an article dealing with how Saddam was lying about having WMDs to prevent an Iranian invasion. Apparently Saddam feared an Iranian invasion - I am not sure why he did he not think the US would respond to such an invasion with force - and thus despite halting his WMD programs & destroyed his WMD stocks, yet went to great lengths to convince everyone that was not the case. Now, the fact remains that while Saddam had destroyed his stock piles and closed down his WMD operations, that he retained both the capability and personnel to start them up at a moments notice. The usual idiot crowd that wants to pretend Saddam was harmless always seems unable to acknowledge that important fact. But the real issue is that Saddam orchestrated a dangerous campaign of misinformation that convinced everyone he had WMDs. I guess with news like this the usual crowd of idiots that claims the WH shopped for intel or that they made it up now will have to come up with a new fantasy to vilify BushHitler with. Scratch that if they follow their MO they will continue to spout the same crap no matter what evidence is presented to prove them wrong. Libs do not care much about facts or logic.

This interview paints a picture where it looks Saddam confused Bush with that spineless Bill Clinton and expected him to follow suit and just lob a few missiles at empty building while delivering some speeches about how Saddam had to be stopped. I guess nobody explained to Saddam that Bush was not trying to cover up the fact that he was lying & telling other people to lie about his predatory practices with women. Anyway here is the meat of the statement:

“He told me he initially miscalculated… President Bush’s intentions. He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998...a four-day aerial attack,” says Piro. “He survived that one and he was willing to accept that type of attack.” “He didn’t believe the U.S. would invade?” asks Pelley, “No, not initially,” answers Piro.

Once the invasion was certain, says Piro, Saddam asked his generals if they could hold the invaders for two weeks. “And at that point, it would go into what he called the secret war,” Piro tells Pelley. But Piro isn’t convinced that the insurgency was Saddam’s plan. “Well, he would like to take credit for the insurgency,” says Piro.

Saddam still wouldn’t admit he had no weapons of mass destruction, even when it was obvious there would be military action against him because of the perception he did. Because, says Piro, “For him, it was critical that he was seen as still the strong, defiant Saddam. He thought that [faking having the weapons] would prevent the Iranians from reinvading Iraq,” he tells Pelley.

I think this, while certainly plausible, overlooks another critical aspect of the way things unfolded. Recall that both France & Russia had assured Saddam that for exclusive drilling rights they would first block any real US military action in the UN, and eventually also remove the sanctions. Simply put, Saddam was suckered by “diplomats” that promised to jaw-jaw the US out of taking action. It really looks that he either did not understand the significance of the 9-11 attacks and what it would force the executive to do, seriously thought his bought cronies in the UN or democratic party would stop the US, and that he could keep playing the same games as he had been for the previous 13 years, all with deadly consequences. So obsessed was he with image that he missed the point he could have worked with us and watched us then turn our ire towards Iran.

The problem is that this megalomaniac miscalculated in a huge way what would happen. He did not do it alone however. The UN, and especially the governments of France & Russia at the time that promised to block action, the people that worked hard to hamper the WH, and the mixed messages he received about the fact that this time we where serious, all served to make him believe he would survive this yet again. I guess looking like the strong horse is a big deal.

One has to wonder if this article now comes out so that the leftist can claim that Iran is now doing the same thing Saddam did with their nuclear weapons program: posturing out of fear that if they claim not to have one, the Americans will invade. Of course it will be all wrong. If the Iranians are afraid of an American invasion, the best way to prevent that is to stop supporting terrorism and come clean & allow inspections to have everyone make sure they are not trying to get a bomb. Of course, if your objective is to get a bomb so it can give you cover not only to continue your terror policies but to escalate them, you have zero interests in doing anything but buying time.

Thursday, January 24, 2008

How to really use science when discussing Global Warming

As an engineer I have been constantly baffled how people didn’t understand why the predictions from the priests of the Man Made Global Warming religion have not engendered scorn and heaps of humiliation on these morons. Anyone that actually looks at the numbers & predictions can immediately see the massive flaws in the whole thing, but just do the numbers, and you find these people are full of shit. Anyway. Jerome J. Schmitt has done a bang up job looking at the numbers, and he concludes & proves in this short piece why these global warming religionists should be laughed at and ridiculed: not taken seriously.

The problem with using science is that while it deals in hard facts it fails to account for the primary motivation driving these lunatics praying at the altar of MMGW: socialism. The fact is that while there are a lot of true believers, the people leading the movement know they are lying. They justify it however because they all believe they are on a noble crusade - to save mankind from the evil of capitalism, a task only they are fit to accomplish as our leaders - to save us from the evils of capitalism (the only good capitalists are those that serve their cause). Because the failures, and the hundreds of millions of casualties, of socialism are easy to see in the history of the last century, they are forced to resort to scare tactics to get enough people to buy into their totalitarian ideas. I guess the short story here is that the only way to sell this global socialist government these people are championing is to convince enough idiots that there is a catastrophe just around the corner, and more importantly, that only they have the solution.

Of course again, anyone with even a bit of scientific knowledge can then immediately surmise that their proposed solution is political and economic, and in no way able to address or affect the real problem. That is if it was a real problem. From the money quote in this article:

Even if sufficient heat is trapped in the atmosphere to raise it the maximum value predicted by anthropogenic “global warming” alarmists (5°C) over the next 100 years, hundreds of times more heat energy must be imparted into the ice-caps to melt sufficient ice to raise sea-levels the catastrophic levels prophesied by Al Gore.

The message from science here is simple: the MMGW religionists are a bunch of alarmist liars, and their lies are told because they have an agenda that requires a panicked and emotional response to a global catastrophe that will not survive the rigors of real scientitifc inspection. If these losers peddling the “End of the world” really believed what they preached they would be clamoring for nuclear energy to solve our emissions. But they are not. In the mean time, they dismiss a real global threat: the rise of Islamic radicalism and its war to subjugate all of us to Islam. Go figure!

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Well La-De-Dah!

Hillareous that the NATO top brass finds pre-emptive nuclear strikes are a necessity in today’s world. Anyone have any doubt who they feel the problems will be coming from and why this policy is necessary? While this Putin is at it again, this is all show for local consumption. These members of the new Ruskie oligarchy are not about to start WW IV and lose the current gravy train they are enjoying. The likely target of this announcement are these geniuses, but when you are a death cultist, I am not sure Mutually Assured Destruction is such a deterent. My fear is that it is all talk anyway, and that we will not do anything until after the fact again.

What do you make about that?

I must say that I expect all the idiots that have been telling us that the days of America being the top dog where over and that China, the EU, or the two together were leading the world’s economies to be having a doozy of a time explaining why an election year campaign to create the illusion America is in a recession or heading to one has resulted in news like this and this, and the drops are not just limited to Asia as this article about stocks in Latin America shows. Now you get my point right? For a “has been”, the news that things where slowing down in the US sure have resulted serious and adverse reactions everywhere else. So either we are not such a “has been” as the traditional anti-American lot of collectivists wants us to believe, or something else is going on. Of course with oil prices flying high and the MSM flaming & fanning the news of recession - we are in an election year and these bastards know that any talk of a bad economy favors the democrat collectivists they shill for - there was bound to be some reaction. But it looks like the Feds are taking action. Is it enough? Not sure, but I do not expect the people that profit from bad news in America to let up. At least not as long as they have won the WH back. Then the economy will suddenly do a 180 as always.

There is no doubt in my mind that the drastic rise in energy prices over the last couple of years is making itself felt. So far we have held inflation back, but the damn thing is that someone somewhere will have to pay for it. The best way to bring down the impact of these price changes, building new capacity and drilling for our own oil, seem to still remain off the table because the usual lot of collectivists continue to block efforts to drill for our own oil, build new nuclear or liquified coal & gas plants to make electricity, are adamant they will not allow it. So my guess is that things are not as bad as these morons claim they are. The day I see this lot of losers agree to let us drill for oil and build more nukes, is when I take them seriously.

Hmmmmmmm..

Sunday, January 20, 2008

According to MSM economy ready to tank, but it grew 4.9% in 3rd quarter?

Again I know why whenever I hear the usual lefitist suspects in the MSM claiming how the US economy is in shambles and ready to slide into a recession I just shake my head and wonder why if the occupant in the WH has a (R) next to his name even great economies are bad, while the ones with a (D) get positive coverage only. Then you get news like this. With all the crap about how the sky was falling - I guess we have a presidential election soon and the MSM knows their buddies in the DNC score when they tell the people that things are bad - recently this news is just staggering.  Don’t worry however. If the democrats have anything to say aboout it they will eventually straddle us with some hefty taxes that will cause that recesion they so pine for. Of course they will not get balmed for it then.

Thursday, January 17, 2008

They admit they lost & have a new plan to make us lose anyway?

If you need any more proof that the sycophants that have been campaigning against our involvement in Iraq were motivated by nothing but anti-Bush, and anti-American, and partisan collectivist political reasons, all you have to do is read what their new plans are now that changes of success for their campaign to make us lose this conflict has all but evaporated:

After a series of legislative defeats in 2007 that saw the year end with more U.S. troops in Iraq than when it began, a coalition of anti-war groups is backing away from its multimillion-dollar drive to cut funding for the war and force Congress to pass timelines for bringing U.S. troops home. In recognition of hard political reality, the groups instead will lower their sights and push for legislation to prevent President Bush from entering into a long-term agreement with the Iraqi government that could keep significant numbers of troops in Iraq for years to come.

The groups believe this switch in strategy can draw contrasts with Republicans that will help Democrats gain ground in November and bring the votes to pass more dramatic measures. But it is a long way from the early months of 2007, when Democrats were freshly in power and momentum for a dramatic shift in Iraq policy seemed overpowering

So these losers, motivated by their dislike for Bush, their dangerous yet childish hatred of America when they are not in charge, and their collectivist partisan political attachment to the Bolshevik democrats, now that they no longer have a chance to help force us to lose, have not chosen to support the mission, but to undermine it somewhere else? This admission that their agenda was to force us to lose a critical battle in the GWoT - and their refusal to accept or concede that Iraq is a major battlefront in that war despite the fact that the very terror organizations we are fighting constantly say so is incredibly telling - for naught but political gain and BDS, should give anyone that sees where they want to take this now a pause. Again, their strategy is not predicated on what is good for America, but on what hurts Bush and helps their collectivist agenda. And while politics are certainly cynical, one must wonder if these people that still put their ideology & quest for power ahead of the welfare of the very people they claim to represent, can be trusted with any kind of power.

Then again, I remain certain that this is all talk on their part. The proof is in the fact that after they claimed to have won in 2006 on a platform of stopping the war - a bald faced lie and inaccurate assertion considering what most people voted for was a change in the war strategy, and not a humiliating withdrawal and catastrophic loss that would energize the enemy’s cause and plunge the world into a radicalized terror war that likely would end in a global nuclear war over oil - they could not even come close to slowing it down. And that despite a well orchestrated and MSM supported campaign of shameful lies about how the Surge had already failed & Iraq was lost, before that Surge was even effectively put in play, and all during the time it was going on. And that was done while clear signs of success where percolating despite the MSM’s attempts to not let people know it was working. More likely than anything, these democrat politicians, thinking they were a shoe to win the WH in 2008, realized that they would have to deal with the mess that this defeat would cause, and then simply resorted to meaningless overtures directed at the anti-war idiot constituency’s demands while having no intention of stopping anything. I am starting to believe that as is patently obvious, these democrats oppose Iraq right now for purely political reasons. Once they are in power I am sure Iraq suddenly will become critical and they will simply make up a reason why they now can not pull out. The anti-war crowd be damned. Besides, the majority of these idiots objecting to our involvement in Iraq now would suddenly do a 180 if a democrat was in charge. Their problem with Iraq is not the policy, the way we are doing it, the lack of WMDs (a bull line if ever), claims of falsified intelligence, a Zionist conspiracy, or anything else they might put up as a reason. Their objections, despite whatever they say, are based on a ridiculous and irrational hatred of Bush, and anger that they are not in charge of the WH.

The anti-war movement also thinks it has a winning argument when it comes to the length of time Americans are willing to see U.S. forces in Iraq. Roughly half of Americans recently surveyed by CBS News want most U.S. troops out within a year, and more than half think it was a mistake to invade in the first place. Every Democratic candidate for president has promised to withdraw almost all troops from Iraq within the first year of his or her presidency.

Hah! SeeBS polls that have conclusions favoring what the collectivists want huh? Say it ain’t so! I am sure the questions were not seriously rigged - like the ones the recent pollster from SeeBS asked me before hanging up when I refused to let them play their game - and biased towards that particular answer. And how fast do you think Americans would want troops back in Iraq once the terrorists moved from attacking us there to attacking us here in the US? Or when Iran goes nuclear and holds the oil flow hostage, drives the price to $350 a barrel, and the economies of the world collapse? Or even better, when these SeeBS poll’s questions, now rigged to suddenly favor staying because we have a donkey in the WH, say people want us to stay as long as it takes? Yeah, I am saying that every one of these democrats is lying about withdrawing troops. They lie about everything else - except their intention to raise taxes on the productive (which they label as the rich while the real rich people like them have their wealth hidden and safe) to pay for the votes they are now buying - so why not about this too?

Screw these collectivists.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Bleh!

After reading Byron York’s piece at NRO on why Romney won Michigan I can only comment by saying WTF?

When rival John McCain said — probably correctly — that some of the state’s lost automotive jobs wouldn’t come back, Romney answered, “Baloney.” He also promised the auto industry $20 billion in federal investment, along with relief from mileage standards and burdensome employee health-care costs. Looked at from the voter’s perspective, one candidate, McCain, offered Michiganders little understanding — the Michigan equivalent of McCain’s opposition to ethanol subsidies in Iowa — while the other, Romney, promised to throw them a life preserver. The guy with the life preserver won.

Now don’t get me wrong, I think McCain is not that great himself and am not looking for him as the republican candidate because he is too close with both the left & the MSM. But York trying to make Romney sound like he is the man for conservatives after he promises a government - meaning tax payer - bail out of Detroit just leaves me feeling dirty. Yeah, I see where he mentions that he will help with relief from government mandated mileage standards and employee health-care costs, but I am willing to bet that I will not like the answers of how he plans to do this either. More government bail outs? BLEH! Detroit’s problem is that they continue to turn out vehicles that are for one reason or another - and cost vs. quality, driven by the big auto maker’s pension & health-care obligations are definitely costly - not as attractive to buyers. No amount of taxpayer financed largess will fix that.

And Michigan is in a recession because the usual groups of parasitic losers that survive by sucking at the government’s teat, a government which in turn leeches from the productive to come up with cash, are in the majority and keep voting in democrats that then enact policies that only aggravate the situation and make it harder to live & do business there. Their problems are home made. Having to offer a pay-off - and these promises of bail outs are nothing but that - to gain votes doesn’t leave me feeling like conservatism of any kind won the day. I guess the axiom “What have you done for me lately” still rules the day. I hope I am coming at this from the wrong angle, but I am not sure this is a good thing.

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Second round

Last night we got the second round of the primaries in NH, and it is no surprise that the usual moonbats are again claiming that they where robbed by Diebold. The funny thing this time is that they are blaming another democrat for being in cahoots with Diebolt, and not the usual opposition party member(s). If you needed any proof that these people can not deal with reality it is this. It is one thing to believe & claim one political party, the one you are against, is in cahoots with some shadow company that helps them to steal votes. It is another entirely to then stretch and claim a political rival in your own party is also in cahoots and keep that train on the tracks. Or is their contention that Diebold is again doing the republicans a favor by picking Hillary, the poor thing again simply being a victim or working with the enemy because she is so power hungry, which the republicans know they can easily defeat? Anyway, this stuff involves so many convaluted and crazy stretches of reality to cling to that a pretzel has less curves than these lunatics. The fact remains that these people can never accept that they are in the minority or wrong.

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Electioneering..

With another election season upon us I found this article by Arnold Ahlert about why liberals are against picture IDs dead on.

It is the epitome of common sense–which is why most liberals are against it. And they can make all the excuses they care to muster regarding it: hardship, “racism,” “disenfranchisement,” inconvenience, “undue burden,” even global warming. Not one iota of it will wash. Quite simply, everyone voting in an American election should be required to show a picture ID.

Why would anyone oppose voter ID? Forget the above rationalizations. They are nothing more than a smoke screen obscuring reality: liberals know that winning elections the “old-fashioned way,” aka convincing a majority of Americans their policy positions are superior is virtually impossible.

What to do? Put “double-dipping” in play. Put the “deceased” in play. Put convicted felons in play. And last, but by no means least, put 12-20 million illegals in play.

Illegals alone could literally turn the tide in any national election. Take one percent of the low end figure of 12 million, and you’re looking at 120,000 votes. But that’s only half of it. The estimated population of illegals on a state-by-state basis reveals that California, New York and Texas are the “big three”. They are also the three states with the largest number of electoral votes in the country.

The fact is that picture IDs would severely cut into the votes - all of them illegal - that libs need to give them a chance. That is why they refuse to debate this issue and immediately level accusations of “hardship”, “racism,” “disenfranchisement,” inconvenience, “undue burden,” and whatever other label will frighten, humiliate, or persuade those seeking voter identification into silence. If you had to present ID, especially with a picture, and an electronic record was kept, cheating would become near impossible. Especially if stiff penalties would accompany getting caught. But the left has a vested interest in preventing any changes that would clean out the system and prevent fraud.

And the MSM knows this but, as usual, has chosen to put its own politics in front of informing the people of the facts. That’s why we will never get coverage of how we voters are really being disenfranchised by all the illegalities that these libs perpetuate to steal a victory. Instead they focus on bogus and always unprovable or disproven stories “hardship”, “racism,” “disenfranchisement,” inconvenience, “undue burden,” meme that paint their political opposition negatively, no matter how obviously false & ridiculous the story, while giving the massive cheating perpetuated by the left, a pass.

Most countries that take their elections seriously demand their voters produce some kind of voter ID. Why do we not have that? And no it is not because of some noble reason: it is because the left can not compete without the cheating.

UPDATE: This issue is not going away as this WSJ article points out> Frankly this is simply about people that need the cheating to score favorable or win and those that want to stop that. The people that need the cheating will never admit thay need or support it so they make up lies about disenfranchisement & racism in order to cower and shut up thei ropponents. We do not let people drive, marry, or fly without a license proving their identity and qualification, but we do not inforce similar rigors around a critical process that determines the future of our nation.

Thursday, January 03, 2008

Looks like the left loses another “massacre by evil American soldiers” story..

Well with the last murder charges dropped in the Haditha case it now looks like all those idiots creaming My-Lai style massacre are now going to have to eat crow. The MSM, the leftist twits, the BDS infected fools, and the democrats were front & center to decalre our Marines where all evil criminal baby killers. Wonder if we will be seeing a clarification and then an appology from this usual anti-American fools. Not holding my breath however.

Happy New Year! get ready for the cold?

HAPPY NEW YEAR! We keep getting bombarded with crap about how warm it has become - and of course the usual collecivists blame man and say that letting them form a global government that redistributes the world’s wealth is the only way to stop this despite the obvious notion that wealth nor man are behind any change in climate - by the usual suspects, but every once in a while someone pops up and points out that this solar cycle is over and the cold will be back. My bet is on the cooling. Of course the alrmist collectivists will be then telling us that to prevent the planet from being covered with ice we need to let them form a global government that redistributes the world’s wealth. Same old shit, differnt day. Enjoy your 2008.