Political commentary from a conservative ideologue deep in the heart of Texas. Member: Jewish-Crusader Alliance, Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
Saturday, February 15, 2003
FRIENDS OF SADDAM
It makes me sick to watch idiots around the world prostesting against going to war against Iraq.
What evidence would be convincing enough for these people to go home and shut up?
I saw Martin Sheen, on a CNN clip, going on about how he was so "proud" to be an American today protesting against war and "for life forever". Gee whiz Martin, is a Kurdish life worth anything to you? And just because you PRETEND to be the POTUS on a TV show doesn't make your opinion any more important than any of the other conspiracy-theory, Chomsky, ANSWER - neo-Marxist crowd, you loser.
I seem to remember grotesque effigies of Ronald Regan being carted around by the chin-turd wearing, clove cigarette smoking, Che Guevarra loving crowd in the eighties protesting the introduction of a new medium range ballistic missle system into Europe. I quite clearly remember being called a Nazi by one of those types for the great sin of enjoying Reagan's 1984 landslide re-election over that pansy socialist Fritz Mondale. But all that didn't turn out so badly did it? The Soviet Union dissolved without a shot being fired. And the Berlin wall came down and Germany was reunited. Do you think this would have happened if we had unilaterally disarmed like the peace activists wanted?
Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee (don't ask my why the hyphenated last name), who should be a representative from San Francisco instead of Houston, was in New York today marching with some group of parents of military personnel against the war. Some bozo with her, whose son is a Marine, was asked why he was protesting. This moron said that he was protesting because if war broke out his son could be injured and it was possible that he would have to "hurt" other innocent people. I've got news for you, shithead, the Marines EXIST TO HURT PEOPLE...the fucking job that your son VOLUNTEERED FOR requires that he risk his life fighting the enemies of this country. His tools are LETHAL WEAPONS. If HE didn't want to get involved in a dangerous occupation, maybe he should have chosen to be something other than a US Marine.
I would be proud to serve my country in an effort to overthrow a murderous dictator who is guilty of ordering rape, torture and executions (actually he is guilty of murder himself), who is guilty of ordering the mass murder of his own countrymen via chemical weapons, who funds homocide bombings against the Jews in Israel and who starves his own people in order to continue to develop WMD's that he swears he doesn't have.
There is no way for any of us who advocate war against Saddam to prove that, if left unchecked, he will pose a huge threat to the US. We know that he is an enormous threat to the stability of the region, but we can't prove somthing that hasn't happened. What I am not willing to do is roll the dice and HOPE (like the stupid French) that Hussein will not release WMD to his terrorist sympathizers. That is too great a risk to take.
The dumbass anti-war groups should trot on back to Starbucks and leave the formulation of American foreign policy to grown-ups who don't believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.
Friday, February 14, 2003
As I was listening to French flatulence tonight, it became apparent to me that we have to release the intellegence information we have to crush the weasels and destroy, once and for all, the illusion that the United Nations is the ultimate authority in disputes between nations.
While thinking along these lines it hit me...why are all of the English speaking countries on board for war against Iraq and the French and Germans opposed? Then I remembered what I had read about "Echelon" - that it is basically a US-UK intellegence gathering network that included as, "second parties", Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Could it be that these countries know a lot more than the French and Germans?
Formed in 1947, (t)he UKUSA agreement was not acknowledged publicly until March 1999, when the Australian government confirmed that its Sigint organisation, Defence Signals Directorate (DSD) "does co-operate with counterpart signals intelligence organisations overseas under the UKUSA relationship". The UKUSA agreement shares facilities, tasks and product between participating governments.
Bush needs to go to the UNSC and lay out the case conclusively (this doesn't necessarily have to be public - we could go to all of the permanent members behind the scenes) with more detailed intellegence. And then we go public and declare war.
We cannot be stalled. We must show resolve. The consequences of doing otherwise are to terrible to think about.
RECENT LACK OF POSTING
Never fear, the lack of posts over the past week is due not to a decrease in bile production but rather to another foray into enemy territory (San Francisco).
One of my clients (who is unaware of my blog) said to me at dinner, "I bet if you took a poll in this restaurant asking if people supported taking out Saddam you'd only get five votes in favor". He meant the five in our dinner party.
HA! There were a lot of good looking women at the restaurant though!
The New Republic Online offers the following (via Instapundit):
"Of course, we'd be remiss if we didn't give credit for this farce to Blix, the man who lobbed de Villepin his softball in the first place. Blix reported this morning that, "At the meeting in Baghdad on the 8th and the 9th of February, the Iraqi side addressed some of the important outstanding disarmament issues and gave us a number of papers.... Although no new evidence was provided in the papers and no open issues were closed through them or the expert discussions, the presentation of the papers could be indicative of a more active attitude focusing on the important open issues." Could be indicative of a more active attitude? Was Blix listening to his own report?
The obvious point here is that if the Security Council wants to believe that Iraq's reluctant presentation of meaningless documents is a sign of future cooperation, we can all forget about that "better world" France is so committed to."
Blix is reverting to form. What a weenie he is.
The Iraqis have had more than three months to comply with the UNSC resolution. According to Blix's previous comments, they have YET to cooperate with the inspectors as 1441 required. If you read what he said today, "(a)lthough no new evidence was provided in the papers and no open issues were closed through them or the expert discussions...", he verified that they STILL HAVE NOT COMPLIED WITH 1441.
Oh, wait...we see hopeful signs! Maybe Saddam will reverse 12 years of defiance and obstruction and cooperate. After all, he did OUTLAW WMD in Iraq today! It is somewhat troubling that he recently AUTHORIZED THE USE of weapons that he claims he does not have and has just banned...but who lets common sense stand in the way of HOPE? Certainly not the French or Germans or Russians.
Unless you assume that the Weasels are terminally stupid, you have to realize that they are acting not out of hopeful pacifism, but cold, calculating self-interest. In other words, they are calculating that the payoff of supporting Hussein is bigger than the potential damage to their relationship with the United States. The only way this makes sense is if, in their evaluation, the US will be a declining power (or, in combination, they have the ability to MAKE America's power decline).
On second thought, they ARE terminally stupid. There are way too many patriots in this country to let that happen. The French have tragically (for them) overreached. The consequences will not be pretty for Chirac and the other surrender monkeys.
Tuesday, February 11, 2003
Chirac was quoted in the news this morning as maintaining that there is no concrete evidence that Iraq is maintaining a WMD program or is hiding stores of WMD. Of course there would be no need to threaten Iraqi scientists if this was true. It would also seem a little odd that the Iraqis would authorize field commanders to use chemical weapons that they don't have (as the tapes Powell revealed to the UNSC indicated that they did).
What could Chirac be thinking? Either he believes that Powell was lying at the UN and agrees with the Iraqis that the evidence was fabricated or he knows that what he is saying is untrue. He would also have to discount the story cited above by the defector detailing the deception of inspectors by Saddam.
The French intellegence services must know that the CIA did not fabricate the evidence that Powell disclosed. If this is the case, Chirac is intentionally lying to the world to prevent an American invasion of Iraq and the removal of Hussein from power.
France has moved from the position of a dissenting voice within the alliance to active hostility to the US. I am starting to believe, as Den Beste has speculated recently, that the French and Germans are trying to hide something. Whatever it is would have to be so devastating if it were disclosed that it would damage their relationship with the US and Britain MORE than it is being damaged by their current oppostion.
Is this why the French want to get an army of inspectors in the country, guarded by FRENCH troops? So they can destroy evidence of their complicity in supply of forbidden materials to Hussein (and perhaps through him even to Al-Qaida)? It sounds crazy but not any more crazy than the way Chirac and Schroeder have been conducting the foreign policies of their respective countries lately.
And what about the Axis of Weasels' block of the movement of defensive reinforcements to Turkey? That was very aggressively hostile both to the Americans and the Turks.
I have been saying that NATO is effectively dead for a couple of months now. But this looks like the final nail. We need to withdraw from NATO and form bi-lateral agreements with Britain, Spain, Italy, the Eastern Eurpoean and Baltic countries, Iceland, Greenland, Norway, Denmark and Turkey (in short, everyone EXCEPT France, Germany, Belgium and Holland - the Weasels).
Let the Weasels rot.
Sunday, February 09, 2003
SCATTERSHOOTING WHILE HIGH ON NYQUIL
I've been working this weekend and sick and taking cold medication....so the combination has left me little time (or energy) to post.
I did get to see about two minutes of Tim Russert's interview with Hunter S. Thompson. What a pathetic, burn-out. I could understand about every third word he said. A true poster child for the long term effects of self-abuse.
On the new Franco-German-Russian plan for sending an army of inspectors to Iraq: I thought that was what the US is proposing. We send in the American army and make sure that all the WMD (and Saddam) is gone.
The sight of Schoeder and Putin standing together after their meeting made me ill. The ONLY hope of getting true concessions out of Saddam (to the point of even convicing him to go into exile) is for the Security Council to support the United States and authorize the use of force unless Iraq complies COMPLETELY with 1441 IMMEDIATELY. The only thing Schroeder, Chirac and Putin are doing is making it MORE likely that war will be the ONLY way to remove the WMD's and Saddam.
I see very little chance that last minute diplomacy will be any more successful than it was in 1991 when the Russians tried to avert war. As long as Saddam thinks there is dissention in the West, he will bank on beating the Americans politically by starting a wider war and suing for peace with the French, Germans, and Russians as brokers. If this happens, he will remain in power and I can guarantee you that the chemical, biological and (eventually) nuclear weapons that he has will find their way into the hands of terrorists who will use them against America (and probably against France, Germany and Russia which is what makes their position so difficult to understand).
Increasingly it appears that France WILL NOT join the coalition at all (although the French capacity for waffling spinelessness should not be underestimated). This will not be benefitial, long term, to the war against terrorists worldwide. However, I think this is a breaking point that would have been reached eventually anyway. Sooner or later, America will have to go after the nests of terrorist organizations in other countries besides Afghanistan; the French and Germans were never going to support that anyway. So we'd best get used to having them in an adversarial position.
I am disappointed that Bush's outreach to Putin has not prevented Russian alignment with the Axis of Weasels.
This thing is getting pretty dicey.