Wasting Time With Alex

Axis-of-Evil

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

Sure the NIE was right…

I was surprised by this article dealing with Germany expelling an Iranian diplomat because he was caught trying to buy Uranium enrichment equipment, not because I am surprised Iran is hard at work trying to enrich weapon grade Uranium for their nuclear weapons program as the NIE claimed, but because the Germans for once didn’t just make the sale. This means something. That Germany declined to make the usual profit because of sales of dangerous equipment to a tyrannical government which has never been a problem in the past, even when there were sanctions involved, is absolutely telling. Why now? What has caused the Germans to suddenly forgo the all might Euro, and we are discussing some serious amounts of cash again here, and even creating a diplomatic incident over it? You do not kick out a diplomat unless you are trying to send a message to their government about their actions (or some other problem sometimes). Germany obviously believed that serious harm could be coming from this sale to Iran, and then likely to themselves, in order to stop it. If they had only known that Iran had given up its weapons program in 2003!

I have read out there that there were all manner of reasons for the NIE conclusion. The most obvious being a political motivated move directed at tying the hands of the WH on Iran. Others have attributed an incredibly clever ploy by the WH to hurt the Iranians by denying Ahmadinejad this powerful piece of propaganda he used to stir nationalism. Some believed it was intended to force the Arab neighbors of Iran to suddenly become serious about both the Palestinian peace process and Iran’s nuclear ambitions.  I have even seen the claim Bush is simply passing the buck to the next guy or that the WH has concluded we can live with a nuclear armed Iran. Only politically motivated idiots suffering from stage 6 BDS however believe Iran is not trying to make nukes. The French & the Germans, whom would be in range of Iranian nukes, seem to not particularly like the NIE report and considering how reluctant these nations are to have to use force it is telling that France is saying they will not accept a nuclear Iran. And then there is Israel which can not gamble on the politics of this report. But the proof is out there and is ample that Iran is hard at work building nukes and not worried about anyone knowing. I sure hope we know what the hell we are doing. Especially if we end up with some retard that is more concerned with dragging America down the path of socialism instead of protecting American lives.

Monday, December 10, 2007

And the Beat goes on..

Can’t say that after that NIE report tying both the US and Israel’s hands on Iran, that I didn’t expect Israel to sound off and be pissed. The people most likely to be in A-jad’s sights are the people of Israel, and they have the most to lose if Iran goes nuclear. While I understand why Washington has been reluctant so far to bomb Iran and give the Mullahs an event that they can use to create a boost in nationalistic feelings and thus support for their hated and failed regime, the problem still remains that Iran with a nuke is a disaster. I am not sure what is going on with this NIE. Some are suggesting that it is an ambitious White House gambit intended to force the so far reluctant Arab neighbors of Iran to come together with Israel and oppose a nuclear Iran. The US so much as saying that the military option is off the boards is sure to scare the bejesus out of every Arab state in the region that was simply waiting for the Jews or the Americans to pound Iran, but it also creates the possibility that several of these people might be so cowed that they follow Syria’s example and actually end up under Iranian influence. That is even more of a problem if we then have to forcibly stop Iran. The fact of the matter is that Iran’s claims to superiority are based on pipe dreams, but a nuke will change the mechanics of the ME, and the world, and then in a real negative way. The fact of the matter is that this NIE has stirred up the hornet’s nest, and that might have exactly been its intention, and brought the whole issue of the Iranian nuke to the forefront. One thing is certain: the claim Iran gave up its weapon program in 2003 is bogus as hell and nobody but politically motivated libtard doves are actually buying it. In fact, quite a few of them are not buying it either as the reactions in Europe, which is more directly threatened by an Iranian nuke, have shown so far. There is something going on here that is above all our heads, but the likely scenarios I see playing out are all going to in the end play out ugly.

Thursday, December 06, 2007

They were right when they claimed politics behinnd NIE findings

The libs that have been claiming that politics were behind the NIE findings were right. Of course the fact is that it now is clear that politics affected the current NIE report and not their usual drivel about how Cheney or Rove used their dark powers to make people lie about Iran. The proof is ample.

The inconsistencies are more troubling when we realize that, according to the Wall Street Journal, Thomas Fingar is one of the three officials who were responsible for crafting the latest NIE. The Journal cites “an intelligence source” as describing Fingar and his two colleagues as “hyper-partisan anti-Bush officials.” (The New York Sun drew attention to one of Fingar’s colleagues yesterday.)

It clearly seems that this “hyper-partisan anti-Bush officials” Thomas Fingar has manipulated the NIE report and is lying, or was lying when he made the following statement last July:

Iran and North Korea are the states of most concern to us. The United States’ concerns about Iran are shared by many nations, including many of Iran’s neighbors. Iran is continuing to pursue uranium enrichment and has shown more interest in protracting negotiations and working to delay and diminish the impact of UNSC sanctions than in reaching an acceptable diplomatic solution. We assess that Tehran is determined to develop nuclear weapons--despite its international obligations and international pressure. This is a grave concern to the other countries in the region whose security would be threatened should Iran acquire nuclear weapons.

Can’t have it both ways, and this turn around despite the massive amount of evidence and all the Brouhaha these last 2 years, where Iran has made it clear that it will build nukes because it has a right to do so, and everyone else has pointed out that iran was building nukes, simply can not be ascribed to anything but a politically motivated hack attack. If he has some proof that has made him do such a serious and complete 180 on what he said in July 2007, then Thomas Fingar has to come clean. But if this is again BDS driven politics intended to tie the hands of the Bush Administration and Israel on Iran, then this fool needs to be slapped down. While he certainly has given the moonbats on the left ammunition to fight any attempt to take forceful actions, the consequence of this load of crap are much worse.

Already those that care not if Iran gets a bomb because they calculate the Iranians armed with a nuke will actually help them out - Russia which would love oil at $250-300 a barrel because they are a major exporter for example - and if they choose to use the bomb will do so against Israel or US assets giving them plenty of time to nuke Iran back to the stone age to protect their own interests, are saying that sanctions on Iran are not needed anymore. And the lunatic in charge of that bus full of crazies in Tehran has already claimed victory for his weapons project, the one the NIE says doesn’t exist because it was supposedly stopped in 2003, and pointed out it was full steam ahead. How likely is he to take any attempts at negotiations to curb their nuclear ambition now?

No you moonbats, this is not a vindication of your BDS motivated beliefs nor a good thing. At a minimum it has given Iran a ton of breathing room to do whatever they want while seriously hampering any and all abilities to use diplomatic efforts to coerce them into not making a bomb. In one fell swoop this idiotic political move has almost guaranteed that we will eventually end up in a conflict with Iran, likely with them having a bomb at the time, and a catastrophic escalation that will go global. But hey, you got to stick it to Bush and can again go about ranting that he is an evil genius-moron that is the biggest terrorist ever. And you wonder why people do not trust your kind with power…

Wednesday, December 05, 2007

Unforseen consequences

Well I bet that the people that thought they were sticking it to Bush and making sure enough doubt was cast on what Iran was doing to prevent both the US and Israel from taking action against Iran did not realize what the consequences to this pyrrhic victory would entail. But the rest of us that live in the real world and do not suffer from BDS can already see that it has just made it easier for Iran to move on with their bomb making project. I am sure these tools never realized that their “gotcha” moment would seriously undermine the very process they demanded be used as part of the only process they approve of, negotiations ad nauseum: sanction on Iran for non compliance. And look how President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reacted:

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - A new U.S. intelligence review concluding Iran stopped developing an atomic weapons program in 2003 is a “declaration of victory” for Iran’s nuclear program, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday.

Was that some kind of translation faux pas? That these people have concluded there was no nuclear program anymore since 2003 is a victory for that very project? No he didn’t seem to say it was a victory for Iran because it was saying all along that there was no weapons project. He is saying it was a victory for that very project. Think that through. How would a report from Washington that basically casts enough doubt to paralyze both the US and Israel from taking action against a weapons program be a “victory” for that program, unless that program was going ahead and now no longer had a serious threat to stop it?
]
But you think this kind of stuff will sink into the minds of the deluded BDS infected fools? Not a chance. They got Bush and got their way, a way which will incidentally lead to a nuclear armed Iran which will then either hold the world hostage by threatening the oil flow in the ME, or likely just use it against Israel and trigger a nuclear world war. To bring that 12th Imam and the “End of times”, of course. Rejoice and pretend you won lefties. However remember that when the shit hits the fan, you can try to blame Bush again, but we will know better and not let you off the hook. Of course, you could care less as BDS has prevented you all from being logical about anything for the last 7 years anyway.

Friday, November 16, 2007

Must read about Iran & the bomb

Over at the NRO Corner Stanley Kurtz has some terrifying analysis about Iran’s quest for the bomb, and how like with the success in Iraq, our MSM is doing us all a disservice - because of obvious political motivations - by not covering it with the seriousness it is due. It looks like we are in a do-or-die situation on this issue, and that diplomacy has failed. Of course, the MSM can’t point this out, because then it might show many how deceptively naive & misguided - on purpose, mind you - their existing coverage on either Iran or Iraq have been. And we can not have that before an election the MSM has decided it must help the appeasement & socialism first left win. Read it all.