We Have No Claim To Pearl Harbor Day

As Victor Davis Hanson writes:

On Dec. 7, 1941 — 65 years ago this week — pilots from a Japanese carrier force bombed Pearl Harbor. They killed 2,403 Americans, most of them service personnel, while destroying much of the American fleet and air forces stationed in Hawaii.

The next morning, an outraged United States declared war, which ended less than four years later with the destruction of most of the Japanese empire and its military.

What struck me most about his column was that there was no grand celebration of the waking of a sleeping giant that was America on December 6, 1941. Instead, he writes mostly of the nearly 3,000 innocent civilians we lost in an attack on New York City almost sixty years later and the trials and tribulations America's global war on terror has become.

I heard a sound clip of Al Gore, a would be Democrat leader and former Vice President on the news yesterday. He, in his particular stupor-ed way, pronounced the Iraq War the greatest strategic mistake in America's history, totally ignoring the tragically flawed policy of a President from his party that turned Iran over to a mullahcracy, thus paving the way for many of our greatest challenges in the world today. He was simply another mediocre politician serving himself and his personal and professional interests yet once more at America's great expense. Regardless of his political persuasion, that such a smallish man could occupy the second highest elected office in this land for eight years is what aggravated me the most.

And then you take this mostly useless useful idiot blogger, Atttyood, and read his screeching prose and quote of how the Right is only pointing out the obvious flaws of today's AP as a means of distracting from events in Iraq.

We noted that this was just part of a broader tactic, to denigrate all reporting about a war gone terribly wrong by nitpicking the photojournalism of the fighting in Iraq and elsewhere in the region.

It is important to get to the truth here. But the point is that the bloggers and the U.S. Army, who reflexively denied the initial account, did so not because they were concerned with accuracy. They picked on it because they saw a chance to use a potentially false story -- though it seems clear now that it might be true after all -- as a way of throwing into question all the reporting from Iraq and, more specifically, undermining the characterization of the situation in the country as abysmal.

And I am left scratching my head while wondering what happened to that great country which once had no trouble identifying and destroying its great enemies when attacked?

America was frightened of nothing when she began, not because she was brave, but because she was afraid of everything, being a mere niche on a coastline in a once distant and still foreboding land.

Yet, through strength, through sheer resolve she ploughed her way across a continent, accomplishing all and everything along the way, stopping only long enough to build this or that great monument to the judgment, character, sense of wonder and over-coming that characterized the strong hearts, minds and backs of her ancestors, the very men and women through whose travails she was so whole-heartedly raised.

Certainly she had her rifts, not the least of which was her own Civil War. But somehow through it all she retained a sense of oneness, a country ultimately indivisible with liberty and justice for all. And while the differences she endures today might not appear to be as profound - they've yet to flow down through her in endless rivers of blood, it is difficult to deny that America's parts have never seemed more distant and distraught.

It's that lack of a feeling of a common Americanism that confounds me most as regards the tough spot we find ourselves in today. Tough, yet many of our self-professed most needy ride in cars not dreamed of by our ancestors and live in dwellings such that even small apartments would seem like castles in a New Jerusalem carved out of so much wilderness back in America's most early and most desperate days.

America was attacked in 1941 and she came together with a resiliency and pride that carried her, not only to victory, but up to the pinnacle of civilization over the next long and often difficult fifty or so years. But the attack in 2001 seems to have torn her asunder and left her bitter, almost desperate and unduly confused.

So, no, I'm sorry. As she stands today she has no right to claim the great legacy initiated by the terrible events of December 7, 1941.

I'm not a complete pessimist. I always hope and often believe America will still prevail. But Americans today appear more hell bent on attacking one another as the enemy, than they do uniting for any necessary common good or goal.

And in her angst the sense grows that what we are all doing is waiting ... until the next December 7th, or September 11th, so that a once proudly united nation can hopefully look inside, take stock of herself and face an ever threatening world as, simply, one, again.

If a House divided cannot stand, then certainly a nation divided can not succeed. And the free world needs, more than anything, a strong united America to succeed. America has been the beacon of hope and freedom for far too many other nations to let them down. And currently, no others appear even close to rising up to take her fabled place - and, yes, I know, perhaps least of all, Iraq.

But it would be an unspeakable tragedy were America to not be able to fulfill that role now for a bare democracy born of little else but America's dream. And perhaps by finding the strength and quiet to fulfill that one do-able mission America won't actually need another disastrous attack to learn that, indeed, she does still have a wonderous and ultimately always united national soul.

Comments

[glenn "rubble trouble" reynolds]

"Al Gore hasn't been right about anything except maybe not taking Clinton up on an offer of a little head from his favorite intern. Tipper would probably leave him if she found out he had oral sex."

Riehl, your cock fixation is starting to overwhelm your posts. I suggest you either come out of the closet or avail yourself of some KY and toilet paper.

[cleek]

>But it does get tiresome when they are always
>so lacking in moral clarity and often misguided, or perhaps just mis-informed

tell us, is it hard being the smartest person in the room wherever you go ?

[Dan Riehl]

is it hard being the smartest person in the room wherever you go ?

Not really. ha ha ha ha ha ha

Really though, please, there are plenty of brilliant people in the world. So I don't really feel that alone. ; ))

[gregdn]

"Cut out some of our entitlement programs and increase the military spend and we might still have something worth being entitled to in 20 years."

Riehl you couldn't get that through a Republican congress, let alone a Democratic one!
Nice thought though.

[Rick]

Lonely on this thread, though.

Cordially...

[Bearer of bad news]

Riehl, you're not "getting to" anyone. You're sad and pathetic. Go beg for respect somewhere else... readers here clearly aren't impressed.

[PooYah]

You're tired and stupid. And now I'm sleepy. Get a life.

[Rick]

" ...readers here clearly aren't impressed."

Whose readers might they be. Why...the sad & pathetic one, of course.

Scary smart, in addition to bearing bad news.

Cordially...

[John Ryan]

Al Gore opposed the Vietnam War but volunteered served in Vietnam and was honorably discharged.

[Purple Avenger]

"None of these Administrations was able/willing to come up with a working policy regarding Iran."

Indeed. Carter threw us down a pretty deep hole there didn't he.

[Dan Riehl]

LMAO I'm being kicked off my own blog. ha ha Reality based community my butt.

[Mike]

Dan, I gotta tell you, I'm a republican, former Marine, combat vet, supporter of the Iraq War, and even I think you are a halfwit. Grow up, already.

[tgb]

Just curious, how old are you? My 7-year-old has stronger debating skills. Heck, even his schoolyard put-downs are more sophisticated than yours.

And by the way, Iran and Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

[bruce]

From here in Australia it sure looks like you Americans are about to have another civil war, but this one will wipe you out. Scary for us here because we need you.

I endorse Riehl's views fully, its exactly what I was thinking.

Al Gore comes here to spread his enviro-cult beliefs, everyone assumes that the US is invincible and they can just sit back and whinge. Give me the WWII American generation again - they understood the world. Now we see mostly fractious loonies.

God help us all.

[Weezie]

The point of my first post was to point out the irony of an armchair warrior sitting on his duffer lamenting the sad state of our "national will". Maybe a little more introspection should have been in order Mr. Reihl.

I should not have used language like "pussies" and "pussified". That is sexist and not constructive. My point stands though.

Moosie: We are so lucky to have had our dads. Thanks!

[larry]

nonsense, bruce. oh, sure, i agree with you about that "upcoming civil war" thing.....couldn't agree more.

but in the upcoming 'left vs. right' american civil war, you needn't fret that it'll wipe us ALL out. just the whiny liberal swine, who will discover to their horror that smartass commentary and threats of civil rights lawsuits aren't particularly good weapons in warfare. imagine their shock when they discover that calling the enemy a "nazi!!" doesn't mean the battle is over; and they won.

i just can't wait to see their faces.

and surely no one is suggesting that the LW pussies will stand up and *fight*....they just say they will. but then, they lie a lot.

lastly, bruce, us real americans wish to say a heartfelt 'thankee' for the support of fair oz. we could ask for no better, truer, more courageous allies than the aussies; we'll be there on the line with y'all when the stuff hits the fan.

[seekeronos]

Admittedly, Bush could have handled the spin to war (post 9/11) a lot better. If the rhetoric of the "Axis of Evil" had been toned down or perhaps not even brought up, we might have captured OBL.

The bigger problem that lurks underneath the real reason for our being in the Middle East comes back to Oil and the Islamists who control it. Hindsight, as "they" say, is 20/20.

It is much too late to undo what has already been done; so few questions remain:

What should be our goal in the ME, containment of Islamism (not likely given our current approach of surgically striking "targets") or securing American access to the oil supply?

As it is, we practically kowtow to the Saudis (arguably still the greatest suppliers of our oil - at least until the major oil fields exact a greater net energy cost to extract th remaining oil, or in practical terms - they "dry" up). This kowtowing to the Saudis includes such things as allowing them to fund Wahabist training schools both here in the USA and elsewhere in the world, as well as opening up the immigration doors to all kinds of Islamists to traffic their hatred of Western civilisation to people of questionable moral calibre, or people who see no other way to advance themselves in the American socio-economic sphere.

This also makes it rather difficult to go completely "weapons free" and carpet-bomb the region into the stone age, much less advance into Iran and nuke them into submission.

I think that we may have already blown any chance at reconciling ourselves to the ME nations - given our "unwavering" support of Israel and our hunger for the oil.

A large part of me is drawn to the idea of slowly pulling out of the ME, drilling the piss out of our off-shore oil resources before we sell them off to the Chinese, and convert the Deep South of the USA into a bio-energy production zone, as well as a tidal energy collector in the Gulf of Mexico.

In other words, revisiting the old fashioned "America First" ideas of the 1930s, but remodeled into the realities of this century. Reasonable levels of protectionism, and reasonable isolationism.

Point the guns and nukes out of Fortress America East and Southwest, draw a clear line in the sands to our enemies; become energy independent, and work together with the remaining friendly members of the Anglosphere.

Close down our southern border to the Mexican invasion of "Aztlan", and energize our industries to supply the needs of Americans.

But then again, I have a nasty cold atm, and this could well be the NyQuil talking. But.... something better than this current situation should be done, before we leverage ourselves further into this Islamist quagmire.

[larry]

what's wrong with "pussified", weezie? the true test of a word is, can it distill a complicated idea/concept into a single word; thus saving us all time & typing?

i can think of no better word than "pussified" to describe how the left & their feminist allies have emasculated modern men these days. true, it's not exactly a PRETTY word.....but then, watching overly caring, excessively sensitive modern men act like women ain't pretty either.

how bad has it become? how pervasive is it? by way of answer, lemme ask if anyone saw US marine general(!)peter pace break down and bawl like a small child, when he was testifying before congress? because *nothing* will terrify our enemies like a crying general! what's even worse is, pace wasn't crying because he'd accidently whacked himself in the nuts...oh, no. he was crying because he "loved mommy & daddy. they came over from the old country. people were mean to them, and they had to work very hard to make it."

i expect i'll catch a lot of flak for saying that. ("fergive me, lord.") but can anyone out there picture patton crying in public? in front of reporters? no? how about bull halsey? audie murphy? smedley butler? dan daly? no? why not?

[TB]

" ... totally ignoring the tragically flawed policy of a President from his party that turned Iran over to a mullahcracy,... "

Yeah, things would have been SO much better if the Shah were in power, huh?

[seekeronos]

Since I am still reading this whilst enjoying a not necessarily healthy cold medicine buzz...

Let us speculate on a few things...

If the Shah were still in power, we would probably have trustworthy, pro-western Persian troops on the ground helping to put the remains of Iraq into order.

And, we would probably have a few less folks looking to get nukes and nuke technology into the hands of the Islamists.

As for the American Civil War II... if that ever comes to pass, it will probably be along racial lines more than anything - but then over time it would gradually reduce us all into feudal barbarism as the oil infrastructure completely breaks down.

Figure on a Nubian People's Republic shaping in the former Confederate states, a "Republica de Aztlan" or at least, a rump state which would be a defacto extension of Mexico running up to the Oregon border going east thru Iowa to the Mississippi River, and the remaining bits broken up into various White Nationalist or Native American states in the Pacific Northwest, and God knows what in the Northeast. The Atlantic Seaboard would probably be a war zone for several generations to come, provided that the Russkies didn't put that region out of its misery first by nuking it.

Amid all that chaos, look for the global economy to tailspin as every nation with aims to power rushes to fill the vacuum of American power (be that real or imagined). Chinese land grabs - Russian land grabs - Japanese nuclearization and blue-water naval rearmament. African bloodletting on a scale that makes Darfur look like kindergarten nap time.

And when the nukes start getting uncorked (by national powers, or those feudal warlords who seize control of particular former nations' nuclear stockpiles...)

...I'd say it would be high time to start repenting, and look for Jesus to pop on in to wrap things up for Humanity shortly.

Having said all that... I would like to think that we still have some sensible people left in this country who would foresee such unpleasant bumps in the road, and at least hold things together long enough to see me peacefully into my grave.

[Dan_P]

I'll go "slightly off topic" with some facts about "after Dec. 7th" that I know about my Dad.
I'm rather tired of reading to all of the above "to and fro" rants.

1. Did my Dad volunteer in WWII ?
No, he finished college, and was drafted early in 1942.
As a married man, with a infant son (that would be me as the eldest).

2. Did he serve, or flee to "somewhere, like Canada", or figure out a "dodge" ?
No, as an enlisted man, he went through a series of "training schools",
successfully completed, and moved "up the ladder" to arrive at flight school.
Where, he successfully completed "the entire course", and became an
P47 Thunderbolt fighter pilot, and a commissioned officer.

3. Was he a "gungho fighter pilot", in the mold of Tom Cruise in "Top Gun" ?
NO ! As far from this as you can get. They told him they needed
"many, many" good men to be pilots. Good men, trained well, to win the war.
Thousands and thousands of pilots to replace those all of thousands "lost".
He did it.
Even though he was AFRAID TO FLY ! ! !
And, he never flew a plane after he left the Army Air Corp in 1947.

4. Did he want to kill "the enemy". NO.
He wanted to do his duty, win the war, and survive.

5. Was he an "ace". No. He simply did the best he could. Using his mind.
And, the skills honed by hours and hours of training. Which, multiplied
by thousands, earned us the control of the skies in Europe and the Pacific.

6. How do I know these things ? Late in his life, I talked about
my "pilot training". And he discussed a "few things". And, I'm
reading "quite a bit between the lines" of his "stories". And, I'm
interpreting about "how bad things really were". So be it.
He lost many "friends and acquaintances" in training. TRAINING !

Am I proud of him ?
Yes.
Last December and January I was honored to spend his last
months with him in "final hospice".

And, I requested an military honor guard for his funeral
in March. And, was totally amazed our regular military sent
an honor guard all the way west across Kansas from Ft. Riley for
the "end part" to his graveside service. For that, I will be
grateful to my grave. And, I sent a letter to their commander
thanking "the men". And, his folded coffin flag occupies an
"inconspicous" place in my living room. Memories can be good.

And, I hope and pray the rituals provided to those families
whom have lost loved ones in our "current events" bring them
a small measure of "similar peace", even though the loss of a
"young one" can never be the same as those living a full life.

I never "had" to serve. In my era, as I graduated from college
with a wife and child, I was "exempt" from the Vietnam draft.
I did not volunteer to go, even though I lost good friends there.

But I certainly respect and admire those who go, and have gone.
And, their families' sacrifice, whether they come home or not.
My Dad came home for a long and productive life as an educator,
and raised his family, including three more sons after me,
produced after "coming home" healthy, although not quite "the same".

Many did not come home then. Some are not coming home now.
Not to anything more than a "graveside ceremony".

Thank you to those who are serving your country.
You are better men and women than I.

[Rick]

Dan,

So many charming, sophisticated, humane and far-seeing commentators you've attracted here. What caused this? Have you recently made sport again of Constitutional authority and Senatorial Svengali Glenn Greenwald, the best-seller of meteoric ascension?

That would be the sock-puppet guy, if I recall.

Cordially...

[TB]

"If the Shah were still in power, we would probably have trustworthy, pro-western Persian troops on the ground helping to put the remains of Iraq into order.

And, we would probably have a few less folks looking to get nukes and nuke technology into the hands of the Islamists."

And we'd have a nice supply of extra fingernails and corpses collected from rabble rousing dissidents asking for things like a free press and the right to assemble.

After all, America always looks the other way when violating human rights and basic democratic principles helps the bottom line.

[larry]

"after all, america always looks the other way when violating human rights and basic democratic principles helps the bottom line".

wow. the leftard recited teacher's anti-american dogma, word-for-word perfect. and here i thought kids today were stupid.

teacher would be so PROUD!

[Jim Harrison]

Everybody believes in democracy so long as the people vote for the guy they like. Heck, on that basis, Breshnev believed in democracy. As every poll shows, the Iraqis don't want us in Iraq, just as previously the Iranians didn't want the Shah. That sort of sentiment has meant very little to the makers of American foreign policy.

The point isn't that democracy is unproblematic. It's plenty problematic. On the other hand, the sheer, screaming hypocrisy of claiming that what Bush wants to impose on Iraq has anything to do with the consent of the governed is simply off the charts. Calling our imperial ambitions democratic only has the effect of giving democracy a bad name.

[Dan Riehl]

What caused this?

Links from Wonkett and Peter Daou, Tbogg and some other fine moonbats as well.

[prozacula]

what caused it was your idiotic linking of iraq and 9/11, just like all the rest of your stupid words, dan.

[TGB]

Yeah, we came for the idiotic initial post, but stayed for the Dan's childish, petulant, cock-obsessed responses.

[Rick]

Well, Dan, cut back on the moron-bait, then. Whydoncha?

Cordially...

[Rick]

"And we'd have a nice supply of extra fingernails and corpses collected from rabble rousing dissidents asking for things like a free press and the right to assemble."

LOL! Indeed, Iran is very lucky to have escaped that oppression these past 27 years. The Mullahs being so gentle and all.

Or do you look the other way when "brown peoples" "religious right" takes charge? Gotta mind that moonbat bottom line, after all.

Cordially...

[Dan Riehl]

Well, Dan, cut back on the moron-bait, then. Whydoncha?

I wouldn't dream of it. This is almost as good as having your own little zoo. ; )

[Fred Beloit]

My, my, my. They must have a new blog tactic now, emboldened as they are by taking back Congress, or is this stronger fury just a result of redoubled frustration. But how disappointed they must be in their leadership. I feel bad for all the troops of the troll army who have descended upon Dan's site. They and Kos must be biting themselves in the back of the neck in fury over Pelosi's bumbling and Murtha's loss. Not to mention that their leadership's new direction on the war now seems to be: "Yeah, what Baker said." And what Baker said is pretty much what Bush has said over and over. Don't worry about us Yanks, you Australians. We have a long history of fighting among ourselves. But when someone from the outside hits us hard enough, and they will one day, we'll get together again for at least long enough to strike back with fatal results for the enemy. Believe it. By the way, we'll still need you then.

[Phoenix]

Your own little zoo? ha ha ha

Yeah, with feral animals named PROZACULA ? What do they throw in his cage for lunch? Exploded hard drives?

.
Fred - Thanks. I needed that. This thread made me really depressed. I'm with you.

[Phoenix]

I would also like to thank "Dan P" for his wonderful comment.

It got lost in the sound and the fury, but it surely deserves a stage of its own.

[Kip W]

Golly, fellow liberal trolls! He's got us dead to rights. Okay, not on facts so much, but between the "lol" and the "ha ha ha" stuff, he's beaten us fair and square on phony laughter. Face it: nothing says "I've got so many facts up my sleeve, and other places, I don't even need to pull any out" like good old reliable phony laughter.

We might as well all slink back to our grim little world with its empirical facts and blue sky and the 1969 moon landing, and let Dan lord it over the folks who know in their heart he's C-A-T smart.

After all, if a guy who enlisted after 9/11 can be laughed off as a "Girl Scout" (oooh, Snap!), what hope do any of the rest of us have to penetrate his mental shield?

[Dan Riehl]

After all, if a guy who enlisted after 9/11 can be laughed off

I guess that's that whole "I support the troops but not the war" thing ya got going on there, Kipper. Good to see!

[Rick]

"...our grim little world with its empirical facts and blue sky and the 1969 moon landing...."

The moment one of you demonstrate such familiarity with life on the planet's surface, we'll be mightily impressed, believe you me.

It'll be like watching circus bears riding unicycles. Applause, applause.

Cordially...

[Jim Harrison]

For the record, I don't think most of the interlopers to this site are trolls at all. Missionaries would be closer to it. For myself, I'm not even attempting to challenge right wing conclusions so much as to spread the news that acting like your rhetorical enemies are Ward Churchills is worse than dirty pool; it's simply not the case.

Carl Schmitt, who got thrown out of the Nazi party for being too right wing, believed that politics is all about making and fighting enemies. I doubt if very many American conservatives have even heard of Schmitt, though his subterranean influence on political thinking has been very considerable; but the creation of boogie men does seem to be the fundamental tactic of your side. Thus you lump thd Sunnis in with the Shi'ias they routinely denounce as polytheists and then associate both these loose and heterogenous groups with the completely secular Baathist ideology of Saddam in order to bolster a clash- of-civilizations apocalypticism that is hard to distinguish from simple racism. Meanwhile, for some reason, American liberals, many of whom aren't religious at all, are supposed to favor the advent of an Islamic theocracy for some reason, even though the same people oppose the American version of Sharia proposed by the goofier part of the religious right. And of course everybody who disagrees with you is in favor of nationalizing the toilet paper factories if they aren't simply Stalinists. Well, if you think these absurd ideas are political useful and you're cynically playing to the cheap seats, there's not a lot to say. I'm just here to point out that they are factually false, if truth with a small t has any credit at all in these parts.

[larry]

lovely speech, there, professor. of course, your "liberals aren't intolerant meanies like conservatives are" thesis goes right down the toilet when we factor in the *liberal* propensity to shout down dissent; as demonstrated on america's (liberal) college campuses daily.

so other than being entirely, completely, 100% wrong, your post was a model of accuracy and brevity. a "gentleman's 'c'" for you! well done!

[Rick]

"...but the creation of boogie men does seem to be the fundamental tactic of your side."

Lee Atwater just rolled over in his grave. Oh, the irony.

Cordially...

[Fred Beloit]

I don't think it is a real smart idea to start adding the charge of "bigot" to the Liberal litany "at this point", as Murtha might say. If you want to read very clearly bigoted statements, you need to go to the leftish sites where they slander the Israelis with "empirical facts" like: Israel isn't reacting to attacks, they are starting them.

[Fred Beloit]

Well, it's time for me to go. I've enjoyed reading the arguments. Only the most dead-ended among us would not get at least a little food for thought from one another. I believe some of you would agree that communicating in forums like this tends to cause us to be more frank and less polite than we would be face to face, say across a table. Hell, some of us might even take a likens to each other..................Nah. (I don't have to be in that situation. I like some of you already.) Thanks for letting me play in your playground Dan Riehl. Looking forward to next time.

[Jim Harrison]

The difference here is that I'm very interested in distinguishing among the various strands of right-wing thought, whereas you guys do tend to be lumpers. Apparently, you do have some things in common, however. Many of you do assume things to be true on mighty thin evidence, for example, as when you write about liberal thought control on college campuses. Since these days most students are in business or pre-professional majors that are hardly the happy hunting ground of left-over Maoists, it is kinda hard to believe that a leftist orthodoxy is really getting imposed on the majority of students. I'm not, as somebody suggested, a prof but I've visited a huge number of colleges and universities in my days in the book business. Outside of a handful of departments like comp lit, I haven't encountered this famous thought control. It seems to me that the real objection or Horowitz et. al. isn't to thought control, anyhow, it's to the absence of the right kind of thought control. On the other hand, maybe some of you think that modern biology is a hide-bound orthodoxy because it has no room for intelligent design or you object to the traditional teaching of philsophy because it promotes the questioning of received ideas and doesn't involve the group chanting of loyalty oaths so prevalent on sites like this. If that's thought control. I'm in favor of thought control.

[Jake]

quote- "And I am left scratching my head while wondering what happened to that great country which once had no trouble identifying and destroying its great enemies when attacked?"

Vietnam and Iraq never attacked us.

quote - "But the attack in 2001 seems to have torn her asunder and left her bitter, almost desperate and unduly confused."

Not at first. George Bush made sure that America was torn asunder, left better and desperate.

[Rusty Austin]

This is like the greatest thing ever, watching the right wing melt down over Iraq. It won’t be long before a cadre of republicans troops down Pennsylvania Avene to deliver the bad news to President Cheney er I mean Bush: resign, or be impeached and removed. I hope you right wing chumps like the words President Pelosi, the first woman to occupy the Oval Office.

[Jake]

quote - "As it is, we practically kowtow to the Saudis (arguably still the greatest suppliers of our oil "

Nope. That's Mexico.

[Jake]

What? Dan Reihl, fuckwad extraordinaire likes editing people's posts.

What a pile of shit. I'm sorry I ever got linked to this pile of crap.

[Pinheads for Bush]

You liberals have got it so wrong. The president is right, that's why he's the president. And he has surrounded himself with intelligunt people who, with their vast years of experience in the military and high office, he relies on for the most accurate assessment of the reality of Commie/Facist/Islamo plans to take over the world and take away our guns, just like you chickens want. That's why he's the decider, a do-gooder, and the MSM which is owned by liberal cut-and-runners like GE, Times/Warner, and Rupurt Mirdock are all in bed with the do-badders. He has a secret plan for total victory, so shut up, or else it won't be a secret and the traitors win! Do you want to lose? All this talk about saving lives and money and you never thought about what's good for America - Do you want to lose! I say we back him in whatever he wants to do because it's good for America. Pinheads for Bush say: Re-elect Bush in 2008!

[John Q]

I guess it's real hard for some to admit(even quietly to themselves) that if Gore had been able to assume the presidency to which he was elected, we may never have suffered the 9/11 attacks.

[citizen E]

Amazing post. I can't tell if this is catastrophic dyslexic myopia, or the ongoing hallucination of that part of our populace who hasn't got the slightest grip on the post 9/11 world. Let me lay it out for ya:
Victory these days, I think, means a stable Iraq, that serves as a base to fight terrorism in the Middle East.
So let's see this is your recipe: Decades of dictatorship; a war, supported by American money and diplomacy with Iran in which 1 million Iraqis bite the dust; followed by Desert Storm in which the whole world witnessed the Iraqi military undressed and under a quail shoot worthy of our Vice President; followed by over a decade of the most stringent international sanctions placed on a nation state in human history (remember Saddam might have bypassed them, but Jane and Joe Iraqi, not to mention little Fatima, felt the pain); followed by a shock and awe invasion by the mightiest military force on the planet; followed by an occupation that was forbidden to be planned for, in which we had too few troops, did not secure the borders, and had a bunch of incompetent nincompoops trying to deal with ever increasing sectarian violence, while the intelligensia fled and are today a major refugee problem in the middle east. You know 2 + 2 =4, don't you. Can you imagine the US if all that happened, Crips and Bloods, the Aryan Brotherhood, Nortenos, the Mob; it'd be crazy out there. You folks don't seem to know a rat's ass about the middle east, or you wouldn't make such incredible claims.