View Single Post
Old 11-07-07, 02:04 PM   #19 (permalink)
DivineComedy
Professor

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Last Online: 11-16-08 12:01 PM
Posts: 2,095
Thanks: 44
Thanked 116 Times in 95 Posts

Current Mood:
Cool
Cool Re: Pakistan's Turmoil Requires A Prudent U.S. Foreign Policy Response

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iriemon View Post
So your point is we really went to war because Hussein gave money to Palesetian family survivors of fighters who died in their fight against Isreal?

You know, I suspect there is a lot of truth to that, but when I suggest it folks like TOT claim I'm being anti-semetic.
No, Iriemon I am not blaming the Democratic party for those leaders coming to power, as not being a Georgia boy you could not know what Jimmy Carter was, anymore than I blame Reagan for his and MY naive support for the Mujahideen against the Soviet aggression:

Before:

We have no desire to be the world's policeman. But America does want to be the world's peacemaker...I'm grateful that in the past year, as in the year before, no American has died in combat anywhere in the world. And in Iran, Nicaragua, Cyprus, Namibia, and Rhodesia, our country is working for peaceful solutions to dangerous conflicts…The new foundation of international cooperation that we seek excludes no nation. Cooperation with the Soviet Union serves the cause of peace…”
State of the Union Address 1979

After:

This last few months has not been an easy time for any of us. As we meet tonight, it has never been more clear that the state of our Union depends on the state of the world. And tonight, as throughout our own generation, freedom and peace in the world depend on the state of our Union…At this time in Iran, 50 Americans are still held captive, innocent victims of terrorism and anarchy. Also at this moment, massive Soviet troops are attempting to subjugate the fiercely independent and deeply religious people of Afghanistan. These two acts--one of international terrorism and one of military aggression--present a serious challenge to the United States of America and indeed to all the nations of the world. Together, we will meet these threats to peace.”
State of the Union Address 1980

My father had a Muslim guide during WWII, I have a picture of the guy, and he taught me to respect Muslims…I loved the movie Lawrence of Arabia and Ben Hur; on Christmas as a kid I would run through the house with a camel bell, jingle, jingle, jingle. So I didn’t even think that our government support for the Mujahideen would hurt us, I was wrong Iriemon, I was wrong, the Mujahideen was infected with a Cancer. A terrorist or mini-tyrant cannot be “fighting for an end to tyranny.” The Mujahideen or “strugglers” is only terrorist if the “Islam” it supports is terrorist, it is only Islamifascist if “Islam” is fascist. Let the Muslims struggle to prove themselves, it is not my struggle. The Saudi leader visiting the Vatican, good start.

We all make mistakes. And my propaganda suggesting that the Fabian socialists aided those leaders coming to power is admittedly made up, possible but made up, as it was evolved over time in response to the Democratic propaganda. None of it was put together until after a Democrat first posted a picture of Saddam shaking hands with Rummy, and another Democrat who did NOT know that Saddam came to power during the Carter administration used it as some proof of conspiracy as if Saddam was ours. I admit it is propaganda, which basically is just a list of facts.

Iran is not ours, and Carter is the one that said this:

1) “DUBLIN, Ireland -- Former President Jimmy Carter accused the U.S., Israel and the European Union on Tuesday of seeking to divide the Palestinian people by reopening aid to President Mahmoud Abbas' new government in the West Bank while denying the same to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.
Carter, a Nobel Peace Prize winner who was addressing a human rights conference in Ireland, also said the Bush administration's refusal to accept Hamas' 2006 election victory was ‘criminal.’"
Carter Blasts US Policy on Palestinians - washingtonpost.com

“Playing by the rules of warfare”

Bringing up Iran (who is now an ally of the Soviets, the other French…) and Hamas only helps to strengthen the conspiracy element of my pattern:

"‘If the United Nations fails to respond to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (meeting in Tehran) then the Muslim world must act and defy these sanctions,’ Farrakhan told an audience of union representatives in the Iraqi capital.” (Louis Farrakhan)
South News Dec 12 1997

If Iraq fails to fully comply, the United States and other nations will disarm Saddam Hussein."

There is absolutely nothing anti-Semitic about claiming that we went to war for Israel, a member state of the United Nations, whose membership should not be insulted by appeasement of Saddam’s terrorism which was in violation of 242, and 1441 due to violation of H32 of UN resolution 687. In the absence of WMD, which the failed Biden and Lugar amendment would have limited the authorization to, there is only Saddam’s support for terrorism that is serious enough for justifying WAR in One Iraq, Two Iraq, Three Iraq! Only a traitor would suggest that I am anti-Semitic, for believing that Saddam was in violation of H32 of UN resolution 687 after his final chance to fully comply.

Iriemon said: “So your point is we really went to war because Hussein gave money to Palesetian family survivors of fighters who died in their fight against Isreal?”

No, my point is that you are a terrorist propagandist for calling terrorists “fighters”:

“Howard Dean has said that Hamas’ soldiers—no one has ever called Hamas soldiers before. Howard Dean has said we don’t take sides in the Middle East. We took sides in 1948. Israel’s our ally. We always knew that. We can’t have a president who is conducting American foreign policy by press release clarification, and we’re certainly not going to beat George Bush that way.” (John Kerry Meet the Press (NBC News) - Sunday, January 11, 2004)

A guy that dresses up like a student, walks onto a bus, and blows up, is not a soldier, a fighter, or a martyr (like Saddam‘s regime claimed in violation of 1441). Only a terrorist supporter or propagandist would say a terrorist is a soldier, a fighter, or a martyr.

I think TOT only suspects you are anti-Semitic because of what else he believes you support. If you support Arabs killing the Jews according to the Hamas charter, you can‘t be anti-Semitic. That is according to the brother of a Palestinian I once worked with who encouraged me to read Mein Kampf, and who once told a joke when I mentioned how good German cars were; “If the Germans are so efficient, how come we have an Arab/Israeli problem?”

*****

On topic, I don’t believe it would be prudent to support unity government with Hamas or tyranny. As Jimmy Carter like support for unity government with civilian disguised Hamas suicide bombers to spare Palestinians from death, and then not supporting Musharraf would be hypocritical. We should not support something unless we feel it is benign. We don’t have to destroy something we do not support, but we must be clear in our diplomatic language.
__________________
“[59.14] They will not fight against you in a body save in fortified towns or from behind walls; their fighting between them is severe, you may think them as one body, and their hearts are disunited; that is because they are a people who have no sense.”

Yeah, a wall and a border patrol will protect us. {sound of laughter}
DivineComedy is offline