Wasting Time With Alex

War on Terror

Friday, April 25, 2008

Reality Check

The news that Brazil has found one of the world’s largest oil fields off their coast might just usher in some major geopolitical changes for the Americas. If these oil fields are as large as the Brazilians claim, and they can bring them up to speed by the 2020 date the article mentions, we will have zero need of oil from the Middle East anymore. And as the article mentioned that carries some major league consequences to our global strategy. Suddenly having a stable Middle East is of no consequence at all for the US. I guess the Euroweenies and the Chinese and Indians will still need oil from that part of the world, but that means they would now have to provide security for it’s flow. I am sure the Euroweenies would end up paralyzed and even more beholden to the nut jobs that would certainly rise up and take over in the vacuum of an American presence - the Euros have no way to provide even a fraction of the security the US is providing and will not do so even if they increase their military spending 10 fold because of their personal politics and the sheeple they now have that has forgotten the value of power projection - and they will pay for that. But does anyone doubt that China would not simply destroy Iran if they got in the way of their oil needs? Of course Iran might just go along with the Chinese and Indians and stick it to the Euros. In either case the Euros are the ones that will get hit hard by this. And any idiot claiming alternative fuels will come to the rescue will have to eat bitter words. This stuff is just pipe dreams.

Of course there is always the possiblity that now that Europe is threathened by this scenario that our left will realize a stable Middle East is important. After all, once we do not need their oil and have no national security interests in the ME, then wasting valuable US resources becomes quite OK with the moonbats. I would reman delighted to see those socialist house of cards in Europe collapse as soon as possible. I still think once they fail misserably people here will give up following in their doomed path. Of course the nut jobs that think oil will soon cease to be the major lubricator of the modern world are going to eat crow as this major oil find just makes it more likely that oil & the combustion engine remain the catalysts to progress for many decades to come. Especially when their MMGW hoax fals flat after the earth cools in the enxt decade. But keep living on fantasies you deranged moonbats. And it looks like the Brazilians with their new discovery will join Canada with the shale oil in getting very rich indeed.

Tuesday, April 08, 2008

Illegal Immigration and a National ID system

I was driving into work this morning and listening to a local talk show and the topic being discussed was a national ID card. The people calling in to make their point seemed equally divided over the whole idea. You had your usual privacy advocates that felt it was a given that the government was going to abuse such and ID system, and you had those that felt it would actually despite the privacy problems and potential for abuse be a valuable tool. The most common arguments of the proponents of such an ID system, including the arguments by the host of the program - and they are totally right about this - was that government already had all kinds of information on its citizens, and especially the law abiding ones. If you drive, own a passport, have been married, own a bank account or credit card, pay bills, own a fire arm, and file taxes - all things most law abiding citizens do - there is no way to avoid the government collecting a ton of information about you. And even if you are not such a law abiding citizen, these many and broad requirements for documentation to function in our society make it nigh impossible to hide from government effectively.

So the privacy argument is moot. It still does not do away with the potential for abuse that such a system would give our government, but that is why we have the second amendment. I should add still to that last thought. On the other side such an ID system does have some values, but that is predicated on the system being used to stop certain abuses. But what struck me as ridiculous was the belief held by many proponents of such an ID system that government would do exactly that when it comes to illegal immigration. I am one of the first people to point out that our immigration system is broke and in dire need of fixing. But I am also of the opinion that the people that circumvent it should not be rewarded for their lack of respect for our laws, but punished for doing that. No matter how good their intentions or their efforts after the fact are. The point is that they broke a law, and allowing people to break laws they find inconvenient, leads to nothing but anarchy. But I digress. The issue is how so many believe a national ID system will suddenly make the government care about enforcing immigration laws.

If your argument is that government already is able to collect so much information about its citizens that a national ID system will simply be a minimal step up on the already existing level of intrusion, then please answer me why government is not already able to control illegal immigration? The answer is simple: they do not want to do so. Democrats like the illegals because of many reasons. They help enforce the images of a poverty stricken populous that requires government intervention to address all the evils of society. From lack of insurance and the need for “free healthcare” to every other two bit socialist program intended to make the people dependant on government hand outs can be made more urgently needed when you pad the numbers with illegals living outside the system. While many come here for a crack at the American dream the fact remains many also suck, and suck very hard, at the government’s teat. Often by design. And do not forget the illegal, and often repeat voters, the democrats could not win elections without either.

Republicans love the illegals because it is huge force of cheap labor. A sad but direct response to government’s attempts to regulate the market and doing a terrible job of it. And many of them also see an influx of a few score of million potential workers as the only alternative to shore up a social security system that will soon have way too many people taking out compared to those paying in. Conservatives have given up on their attempts to do away with that SS Ponzi scheme and have settled for prolonging the agony and leaving the though decisions up to someone else down the line. They see that in the near future SS will either end up paying out so little it means nothing, be forced to take such a huge chunk of the income of those still working to stay viable that it basically becomes a disincentive for work, or simply goes belly up. To correct that they are hoping to skew the ratio of those paying in to those collecting back in favor of those paying in for at least a few more decades. Stupid by any kind of logic because what we need is for SS to be killed off and people to get their own way of saving for their retirement if we want to prevent that system from going belly up and leaving one or 2 generations to suffer the consequences on that dependency.

Anyway, back to the national ID system and the lame argument of how it would help enforce or curb illegal immigration. If the government has no incentive to curb illegal immigration right now, and while it has so much information about its citizens already, and turns a blind eye to the entire illegal immigration issue, why do we thing a national ID system will suddenly make them change their minds? Basically the people claming that such a system would be a powerful tool to combat illegal immigration forget that the only reason we do not have a much better response to illegal immigration is that government itself has no desire or reason to enforce the law. Getting such a system will not change that underlying problem. So it is a dumb argument to begin with. it is like the constant lawmaking around gun violence when existing gun laws are not enforced. It is meaningless. Let it go. If your concern is illegal immigration address the problem now by making our government change its mind about enforcing it more rigorously first. Everything else will be a waste of time.

Friday, April 04, 2008

Only one of the many we get told about

This story is recieving minimal coverae, but it is recieving coverage, unlike the many other attempts by the fanatics that hate the modern world and those that will not bow down to the evil they worship. You will likely hear tons of idiots making excuses as to why these barbarians feel justified to commit these evil acts. Many of the excuses will be made by the very first people these barbarians would kill if they had buta chance: the idiots on the left. The many details of how they conspired to wanted to kill as many as possible to break the airline industry and to completely change modern transportation in the West, is frightning. This is about the most vile form of hatred and lack of respect for anyone that will not submit to their will. The idiots that tell us if we but left these people alone in their corner of the world things would be fine ignore the fact that these people are already amongst our mids. This is a war. I remain convinced that tens of thousands more have to die on our side before we wake up to that reality. A couple of hundred thousand all at once before the America hating libs will shut up and let the rest of us do what is needed. This problem will not go away. The MSM hucksters will down play it - they preffer stories that make the West, and especially the people that do want to fight this evil look bad and have no qualms manufacturing those stories - and give it short shrift. To them it is just another bump in the road. However there is no denying that it is getting uglier and uglier out there. The other side is at war with us. We are sleeping at the wheel.

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Why who is in the WH matters.

Many of my fellow conservatives have taken the stance that since McCain is no worse than your average democrat when it comes to his social beliefs, showing your dissatisfaction with him by helping a democrat win the WH and then get the blame for the damage the supposed socialist policies both they and McCain would enact will help the conservative cause. I think these people are crazy because they are hoping that a shift to the right in Congress would somehow check a donkey in the WH. i am not sure why they feel so assured Congress will go right in the next election. But that is an argument for a different time. What I am writing about is the presidential power to appoint judges to the SCOTUS. It is a given IMO that the next president will appoint at least 2 judges. All you need to do is read this article about the effects of the Medellin v. Texas SACOTUS decision and this other one about how that decision translates to the US ratifying the Kyoto protocol or some other such international treaty would have played out if the left had been the majority on the SCOTUS and abdicated our Constitutional rights to some international body like the ICJ. Read them both.

Monday, March 10, 2008

Stupid idea!

Do you want to see a really dumb idea? Check out how the Intel guys think they will convince more people they are not the bad guys. Again with the “Hearts & Minds” thing? The problem with this approach is that the people that in general hold the opinion America is evil and its intelligence organizations are the spearhead responsible for that evil, are NOT going to change their opinions if they find out how the whole thing works. In fact, I guarantee that what will happen when they get the details will hurt our country more. These America haters will not suddenly soften their rabid hatred and opposition to anything pro-US once they realize how dangerous the world is and how idiotically PC the intelligence community has become. In fact, what they will do is sift over everything they get and only and specifically look for anything and everything they can use to do further damage to our ability to collect any kind of intelligence. Remember that we are talking about persuading the people that believe that the GWoT is a false and evil conspiracy to screw others and anything that helps America is a bad thing, that what the intelligence community does is good. That is the same as trying to convince the most radical PETA members that eating meat is OK. You can’t do that. And you can’t try to play nice with them because they will not.

Thursday, March 06, 2008

Supporting the troops?

Looks like terrorists, or the usual terrorist supporting leftists that get angry when you point out they both lack patriotism and hate the very country that gives them the freedom to be idiots and are siding with the enemy have struck again. How are they going to spin this attack? We hate the war and support the troops by bombing recruiting stations? Could this be a ploy by the Berkeley city council to move focus from their fiasco with the Marines? Inquiring minds want to know!

Exposed crook is pissed

Is it any surprise that Chavez is calling the Columbian raid to kill a FARC commander a war crime? Remember that we are dealing here with a man that has made it his top priority of spreading the very misery he has inflicted on the Venezuelan people to his neighbors.

CARACAS, Venezuela — Venezuela and Ecuador warned that a regional diplomatic crisis wouldn’t cool down without clear international condemnation of Colombia’s government for a deadly cross-border strike leftist rebels hiding inside Ecuador. On Wednesday, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called the Colombian raid that killed two dozen rebels a “war crime.”

In a bid to defuse a dispute that has seen Venezuela and Ecuador move troops to their borders, the Organization of American States on Wednesday approved a watered-down resolution calling the raid on the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia camp a violation of Ecuador’s sovereignty.

Sure there is an issue here with Columbian troops violating Equador’s soveighnity, but why would Venezuela care or act the way it is acting? Could it be that Venezuela has a legitimate beef here?

Chavez, a leftist ally of Ecuador’s president, called Saturday’s attack by Colombia’s U.S.-allied government a “war crime” and vowed to limit trade and investment with Colombia. “We demand condemnation of the Colombian government for this aberrant act,” Chavez said.

Well, no. The truth is far more sinister. You see, what has Chavez really pissed is the information that the Columbians found on a captured laptop. See Chavez has been sort of playing it up that he was trying to mediate the conflict between Columbia’s people and the communist terrorist/criminal organization FARC, but the truth is that the SOB has been in league with them for almost a decade and has actually been busy trying to undermine the elected Columbian government.

BOGOTA, Colombia — Files in a laptop computer seized from the wreckage of a Colombian rebel camp in Ecuador offer new insights into Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s desire to undermine Colombia’s U.S.-allied government. If authentic, the computer files suggest Chavez has been in league with the rebels for more than a decade. While Chavez is not one of the correspondents, his sentiments are conveyed in numerous messages exchanged by the rebels. Venezuela contends the texts are lies and fabrications. If so, they are expertly done.

...

They indicate that Chavez, seeking to raise the FARC’s stature and relieve it of its international pariah status, shares their goal of isolating and discrediting Colombia’s president, Alvaro Uribe. But do they prove that Venezuela was actually financing the FARC’s bid to overthrow a democratically elected government? That’s not clear. Naranjo alleges that the number “300,” also called the “dossier” in a Dec. 23 message signed by Marquez, refers to a $300 million gift from Chavez to the rebels.

And now we have the truth. Chavez’s anger is because the Columbians now seem to have proof he has been actively undermining their government, a tactic he has accused others of using against his own government without any proof, while pretending to have good intentions. Should anyone however be surprised that a Marxist resorts to subterfuge and vile practices while not only lying to the international community about what they are doing but accusing others of doing the same to them? Not really. This is SOP for these types of evil bastards. Of course, this will likely endear this crook even more with the usaal leftist twits and the terror masters like Chavez’s buddy Ah-Mad in Iran.

This might not play well for the democrats that have been actively undermining our relationship with Columbia, a staunch ally, and paying lip service to that moron Chavez. A real man of the people. Of course “The people” in this case are the socialist overlords that want to enslave humanity in that misery they pretend is social justice.

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Speech by the guy Obama wants to talk to..

Have a look at what that guy Obama says the US needs to be talking to has to say. Have no doubt that when he says “the name of Iran means a firm punch in the teeth of the powerful “ he means that Iran is busy pissing on the US. Yeah, he is busy trying to woo his base in Iran, but he means what he says. Come to think of it. Obama’s stance on foreign policy reminds me very much of the one the radical left used to have during the Cold War: they could not wait to engage the USSR in “talks” but despised anyone of the people they tended to look down upon that were our allies. I guess old habits die hard. Contrast that with what Obama wants to do with Musharaf, a reluctant ally in nuclear armed Pakistan, whom he wants to start a shooting war with. What do you think would happen in Iraq, and the ME in general, if Obama pulls our troops out of Iraq as he is promising? Think Ah-mad would hold back just cause Obama wants to talk? $350 a barrel oil, a shooting war, and probably eventually a nuclear one too, is almost a guarantee. Of course Obama told us if that happened he would send the troops back. I am sure the troops are all happy that after wasting 5 years plus of their sacrifices, cutting their budgets, and allowing the enemy to take the lead in the GWoT, they now get to go back with the threat of a nuclear attack against them on the line.

Saturday, February 09, 2008

DOH!

Well it now looks like another “Green” idea, always something coming from the left, has been proven to be more damaging than good. This is the kind of crap you get when the feel good, “action now” crowd gets its way and forces changes without really having them be analyzed.

Almost all biofuels used today cause more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional fuels if the full emissions costs of producing these “green” fuels are taken into account, two studies being published Thursday have concluded. The benefits of biofuels have come under increasing attack in recent months, as scientists took a closer look at the global environmental cost of their production. These latest studies, published in the prestigious journal Science, are likely to add to the controversy.

These studies for the first time take a detailed, comprehensive look at the emissions effects of the huge amount of natural land that is being converted to cropland globally to support biofuels development. The destruction of natural ecosystems — whether rain forest in the tropics or grasslands in South America — not only releases greenhouse gases into the atmosphere when they are burned and plowed, but also deprives the planet of natural sponges to absorb carbon emissions. Cropland also absorbs far less carbon than the rain forests or even scrubland that it replaces.

So guess what? Most of the crap the greens want us to switch to from oil based feul is worse than oil. But hey, they go action and mandated (no not to guys going on a date) that this crap be the norm before anyone knew if it was good or bad. Of course most people that were not infected by an insane level of anxiety or anger for oil, coupled with some scientific knowlegde (not the concensus kind either), predicted this was going to be the case from the start. While some doubters might say ethanol or methanol from waste biomass might prove to be better, I remain skeptical about that posibility as well.

I do however agree with anything that sticks it to OPEC. If we are smart we start drilling here in our continent for our own oil, build a ton of new nuclear facilites, process and make clean liquified coal feul that can be used in new plants designed to use this cleanly, and in general remove all use of oil for anything other than transportation (with lots of efforts to eventually do that as well). It ought to seriously drop the demand and prices, but more importantly, cut dependency on OPEC or Russia which do not good with this new found wealth & power.

Friday, February 08, 2008

Libtard learns the wrong lesson

I found it really ironic that Neil Young realized that it is stupid to believe that music can change the world, but could not carry that further and see that the only thing that matters - not words, not thoughts, not feelings, not good intentions, not legal mumbo jumbo, and certainly not music - is the ability to use force to deal with evil. Of course, since he like the bulk of the libtards is stupid enough to think that the evil comes from America or Bush, even if he could carry it further he would likely be on the wrong side. The hippie culture is one of the most dangerous things ever to have happened because it inculcated the idiots that succumbed to it with the horribly stupid belief that force was never an option and thus inherently evil itself. These idiots will never see the light until they are the ones suffering personally and are left with only force to defend themselves. Of course just understanding that the use of force is sometimes the only way to stop evil is not enough. You have to have the capacity of distinguishing between real evil and politically motivated white guilt: the bane of the libtard.

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

MSM bias shows again…

I saw this article dealing with Prince Andrew’s comments about Iraq yesterday and at first glance was simply going to dismiss it as more of the same & usual media bias that focuses on the minutia that advances their political agenda while ignoring the real message, but I continued to think about it and suddenly was hit by something that i figured should have been real obvious. Anyway, if you missed the stuff that had all these collectivists that pretend to be journalist sporting a boner, it was Prince Andrew’s comments how the WH - and the media immediately inferred that he then meant that idiot BushChimpyMcHitler - had ignored their advice on how to deal with Iraq, and for that matter the GWoT.

Now this brings up one giant can of works and begs for a ton of clarification. First off, what was the advice? If what the British suggested was to impose martial law on Iraq, to keep order while the allied forces build up a new Iraqi police force, military, and government based on democracy - like we did to Germany & Japan after WWII - then Prince Andrew is dead on. The fact is that WH made a huge mistake in trying to play to the idiots that opposed US action that we meant to do well and where not there to steal the oil. Basically it was a play designed to soften their opposition, and even woo them to see what we were doing as a good thing. But it was destined to fail because the ideologues it was attempting to convince we meant well would never, ever do change their minds. To these idiots the US is at best unable to do anything but evil, even when trying to do good, and at worse an evil entity responsible for all man’s ills. It is a waste of time to even try and cater to this kind of idiotic belief. So instead of using might to establish order and then democracy, we tried to create democracy in chaos, and ended up with 4 wasted years. Had we aggressively pursued and killed any & all opposition, established order & the rule of law, and then gone about fixing the infrastructure needed to create a democracy, we would have avoided a lot of crap. Of course not the crap from those that have a vested interest in seeing us fail, but then again we should never let these losers dictate what we do.  Anyway, had the British recommended this, then we have to agree we bungled that, and did so badly. But the problems we created by not doing this are no excuse to fail and lose like the morons that are pushing this as news actually want.

But if what Prince Andrew says they proposed was to install another dictator, like they did in the past, then he is off his rockers. The very reason the ME is screwed up today is that we kept strong men that sided with us in power. Now, do not get me wrong. At the time the Cold War was raging and this was a necessity because the alternative would have meant the spread of the evils of collectivism and the enslavement of mankind to one of the vilest forms of oppression - of course sold as an Utopian solution to all man’s ills - ever to visit itself upon mankind. We needed to keep these places from going red, and that was the best and simplest way to deal with that menace. But after the fall of the USSR and the changes that created to the world, especially the rise of radical Islam, this simply was not a working solution. The biggest problem in these ME nations is the fact that these people, deprived of any real freedom & prosperity (and that despite all their oil wealth), have become the vessels for some of the most illogical, dangerous, and deadly ideas & ideologies to ever plague the planet.

In a past where their reach was limited this was not an issue we needed to worry about. But in today’s modern world, these things can not be left unaddressed if we in the West, once the leading and prominent majority of the world’s population but now dwindleling and declining, wish to keep our values. The enemy has made it clear to us. They acknowledge & accept that their societies have failed to make the same advances we have. But they do not attribute that to their own failings. Instead many blame us for holding them down, or too often - based on the old Soviet imperialistic propaganda that told them the West became rich and prosperous by stealing from them - for stealing their wealth & futures. But the worst lies are the ones that told these people that the West had made a deal with the devil to get where it was. Suddenly there was no reason to aspire to make the same advances the West had. In fact it allowed the hate mongers to then advance the agenda that the right thing to do was to destroy the decadent West and recreate the world in their image. More of the same old that we relied on back during the Cold War, and in fact even before that, was not in any way going to solve our problems.

We have to change the way things work in the ME. We have to change the fact that so many envy us - and no you collectivist twits that will not be done by a redistribution of wealth scheme or by the modern West rolling back its advances or the things that made it prosperous but by making these people accept those things that helped us build our wealth and prosperity - and their delusional attitude that since they could not do what we did they should destroy what we have to level the field. That’s what the GWoT is really about: kill the ones we can not change, change the ones we can. And if we fail we can kiss the way of life we have now goodbye.

But of course, we should never expect the collectivists in the MSM to address any of these things. They do not even want to acknowledge that we are living in a time where we are experiencing a clash of civilizations. They are still pissed that the wrong side won the Cold War and that one of their guys is not in the WH, and they will be damned and see us all burn before they do anything that helps us defeat the people seeking to drag us all to the 7th century. I guess the axiom “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” applies in spades here.

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Not because we are dead wrong…

It looks like at least some of the idiots at Berkley that decided to ban the Marines from recruiting in their anti-American collectivist commune are having second thoughts about the whole thing. But the reason why is not that they suddenly realized they where wrong. No, siree. The reason is that they now see the focus and anger directed at them, and fear the consequences.

(02-04) 18:52 PST Berkeley—A week after blasting the Marines as “unwelcome intruders” in Berkeley, two City Council members want the city to back off the declaration that ignited the wrath of the nation’s right wing and inspired a Republican senator to try to sever Berkeley’s federal funding.

Council members Betty Olds and Laurie Capitelli on Monday proposed that Berkeley rescind its letter to the U.S. Marine Corps that stated that the downtown Berkeley recruiting center “is not welcome in our city,” and publicly declare that Berkeley is against the war but supports the troops.

The City Council will vote on Olds’ and Capitelli’s two proposals at its meeting next Tuesday.

“I think we shouldn’t be seen across the country as hating the Marines,” said Olds, who voted against last week’s proposals. “If you make a mistake, like we did, you should admit it and correct it and move on.”

I thought that was the whole point of this crap. To show the world, or at least the America hating world, that you ungrateful collectivist bastards hated the military. I guess they thought this idiotic grandstanding would stay local, and that the usual scum would be the only ones to respond, and then do so positively. But they did not count that they would be exposed for the creeps they are, and that people - especially the sane ones that do appreciate & understand the important role played by our military, do not hate their country, what it stands for, or those that defend it, and more importantly have the ability to make these losers at Berkeley pay - would not agree with them.

Have no doubt that what you have here is the mask slipping of the face of the angry left. The idiots at Berkeley just misplayed this. Most of them know that if they say what they really believe the majority would have nothing but scorn for them. So we get crap like “We support the troops, but not their mission” or “Bring our soldiers home, even if that means we lose and their sacrifices are for naught, because we care about them”. Bull all of it. The real sentiment was expressed by those that wanted to ban the Marines.  But now that there might be consequences they are rethinking things and putting the mask back on.

Andf how did the anti-American idiots in Code Pink react to the news?

Meanwhile, the Code Pink protesters said they were disappointed that Berkeley might rescind its letter to the Marines. “I hope they’re not acting out of intimidation,” said Code Pink spokeswoman Medea Benjamin. “Berkeley is a city of peace, and a recruiting station does not fit Berkeley’s values.”

Yeah, right. Berkeley is a city of America hating collectivist scum. I still say let them enjoy the very freedom those Marines they want to kick out have given them: the freedom of speech. But also revoke all their federal funding when they get rid of our troops. This kind of scum are very good at grandstanding. But only as long as they do not have to face any real, and especially financial, consequences to their cowardly & disgraceful acts. We should not let these people continue to pretend like their intentions are good when they are vile.

Friday, February 01, 2008

Media & the troops

I found Strategy Page’s short report dealing with how the constant lying by the MSM & democrats about the war has affected the troops very interesting. To anyone but a Bush/America/capitalism/war hating partisan hack, the fact that the MSM has manipulated and outright lied about the war, often to make it look like a lost cause and to paint our troops in the most negative possible light so public opinion would turn against both the troops and the war, is obvious. They have been nothing but a mouthpiece for the dregs of our society, including the politicians that would say and do things that would kill our troops & citizens if it got them power: the democrats. But there are consequences in today’s information age:

February 1, 2008: One story the American mass media won’t touch is the impact of inaccurate and biased war reporting on the troops. Unlike in past wars, the troops are able to keep up on the news back home. With web access, and email from home, inaccurate and hateful reporting on the military reaches the troops quickly. This has had some interesting results. Aside from creating several million troops and veterans who now no longer trust mainstream media military reporting, it’s made the job of reporters harder. New reporters have come to expect that whatever inaccurate military reporting they have done in the past, will be quickly known by any troops they interview. You can’t hide from Google.

The troops know what is going on and know that these bastards are making their jobs more dangerous and harder, if not outright helping the enemy’s cause. You can bet that these people will not trust the MSM hacks ever again. That’s a good thing in itself. The more people wake up to the reality that the MSM is biased and that bias is constant in their “reporting” (more like propagandizing), the more people are able to not let them dictate policy. We left Vietnam because the MSM told us we had lost. Anyone that is not a leftist twit knows we did not lose the military conflict but had politicians stab the troops, our country, and South Vietnam in the back. The MSM tried to do exactly that now in Iraq. If it was not for alternative news outlets they would have likely succeeded too. Lucky for those of us that have not fallen to the collectivist clap-trap bull, they no longer can do this unchallenged. What we need to push is that in the case of the war they overplayed their hand and that is why it so obvious. Just like the way they fawn over the left’s politicians in this years election cycle or the whole MMGW joke. But they are harder to peg on other things where they are more subtle.

The things is more people see through the ruse than ever, and that is good.

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.

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.