I've got an idea. Why don't we try winning a war completely, just once, and see how it works?

Trackbacks have a problem?

My open post entry: What Haven't You Been Told?

Sorry about the multiple trackbacks--software screw-up!

From: The Alleged Mental Case
To: The Assistant Village Idiot

RE: Why don't we try winning a war completely, just once, and see how it works?

What a concept!

Oh, well, Server said 'You are pinging trackbacks too quickly. Please try again later.'

Here's my contribution:

http://chaoticsynapticactivity.blogspot.com/2005/11/echos-of-vietnam-war-today.html - Echos of the Vietnam War Today.

I got the pinging too quickly error as well.

http://www.sablogs.com/index.php?blog=46&title=a_letter_to_our_troops

Et tu, Rummy? Look who's playing CYA in Washington! In the immortal words of Gomer Pyle, USMC: Surprise, surprise, surprise, Sgt. Carter!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/08/AR2005110801072.html

Better file this one under: Rule of Law: For Everyone But Wingnut Repuyblicans

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10625

This just in from the commie coward fringe:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/11/18/iraq.plan/index.html?section=cnn_latest

@ patience, young Padawan. Your feelings get the best of you...

"The suggested Democratic prescription was 'Cut and Run', that turned out to be a 'Vote and Run' at 403 to 3 against."

All Things Beautiful Trackback The 'Cut and Run' Prescription for Iraq (UPDATED)

The only cut-and-run president in my memory was Ronald Reagan, who stuck hundreds of marines at the bottom of a hill in Beirut and then ran away as soon as 240 of them were killed by a truck bomb. Of course, Republican cowardice under fire doesn't count at the Mudville Republican Gazette.

p.s.: Speaking of Mudville Gazette's proclaimed support for the American soldier, how come not a peep from you people about the cutbacks at the Veterans Administration?

How ironic that most significant progress in world peace and freedom in my lifetime, in terms of numbers of people liberated from totaliarianism and disarmament, was made when we let "cowboys" like Reagan and our current President take the reins of our nation.

They did confront evil, to the consternation of do-nothings like you, Wilson ... but they did have to choose their priorities, and (2) in the case of Reagan, had to contend with a nation and an "international community" still susceptible to the siren song of "do-nothing" that you sing ... so he left Lebanon hanging, just as Bush 41 left the Shiites hanging in 1991, to America's shame.

Where were you then, telling him to NOT cut-and-run while Kerry, Kennedy and the rest of the Dihimmicrats were preaching just that?

Confronting evil. Yeah, right. Reagan looked in the face of evil and ran away. As for the Idiot in Chief, his answer was to quote Western movies and the Batman & Robin comic books. By the way, Baghdad Bob, where is Bin Laden anyway?

Kurt Vonnegut has outed himself as a terrorist sympathizer.

Excerpt:

Vonnegut, 83, has been a strong opponent of Mr Bush and the US-led war in Iraq, but until now has stopped short of defending terrorism.

But in discussing his views with The Weekend Australian, Vonnegut said it was "sweet and honourable" to die for what you believe in, and rejected the idea that terrorists were motivated by twisted religious beliefs.

"They are dying for their own self-respect," he said. "It's a terrible thing to deprive someone of their self-respect. It's like your culture is nothing, your race is nothing, you're nothing."

Asked if he thought of terrorists as soldiers, Vonnegut, a decorated World War II veteran, said: "I regard them as very brave people, yes."

bin Laden? In a cave somehwere, managing his video-tape club, I guess. He's not our only target in the War on Terror ... right now we are dealing with his hands and feet; the headchoppers and the human grenade brigade, who you seem to never criticize.

If we got bin Laden now, those elements wouldn't dry up and blow away ... decapitating your enemy in this case will certainly not bring about an end to hostilities. So instead, we did everything prudent to capture him (unlike your hero Mr. Clinton), and, not achieving that, left him to whither on the vine in Afghanistan, his communications and control capabilites diminished to letter-writing, videotape, and couriers.

And, you might want to ask Eastern Europe and Gorbachev whether Reagan "ran away" from the Soviets ... even in the face of Soviet bluster, and attempted undercutting on the part of John Kerry et. al.

His opponents said he was going to start a war ... his actions ended the Cold War, liberated Eastern Europe from totalitarian rule, and facilitated REAL reductions in nuclear arms.

Now, his actions in Lebanon (along with Bush 41's refusal to support the Shiites in Iraq after Desert Storm) were a black eye for America ... however, in these cases our leaders listened to the do-nothing siren song you and the diplomats both sing, when prudence dictated otherwise.

It was "your side" that consistently and stridently advocated such INACTION, Wilson ... and millions SUFFERED for it.

Fortunately, we have someone in the White House now who learns from history ... and despite your rants to the contrary, does everything in his power to not repeat such mistakes in our past.

Go ahead and rant ... make my day.

NEW MUDVILLE POLL:

Who sounds more like the famous Baghdad Bob, in terms of their outrageous claims?

> Rich Casebolt
> Wilson Kolb

Please leave your votes here.

Rich, that's like asking the German public in 1939 who they preferred, Uncle Adolf or that complaining Jew down the block.

I am sad :( that my trackbacks are no longer accepted.

Wilson, actually, it's more like asking the British public if they preferred Churchill, or that advocate of do-nothingness, Lord Haw Haw.

Something to remember: The United States launched an unprovoked attack on Iraq in 2003. This was done on the basis of premediated lies by the Bush administration. As part of the war, the U.S. military incorporated torture into its standard operating procedures. Both of these actions are war crimes as established in the Nuremberg Trials of 1946.

I don't think your Fake President and his VP of Torture will ever be put on trial for war crimes, but they should be right along with Rumsfeld and the senior military leadership who participated in the planning and execution of these policies.

Seeing that Wilson Kolb is not answering any of the comments and intellectual arguments presented to him, but is merely listing DU talking points, I recommend we don't get too excited.

@ Rich patience, young Padawan.

DU, hey they're just as bad as you guys are. Maybe even worse. After all, Greyhawk has only banned me once and DU has banned me more times than I can count. Extremists are afraid of opposition regardless of their stripe. As ridiculous as "Greyhawk" is, at least for now his/her site tolerates dissent. Probably as a tactic, but so be it.

I'm not sure your contributions qualify as "dissent," though.

I hate when people refer to military members as "kids" and "children".

http://www.thepaladinblog.com/wordsbydave/2005/11/20/kids.html

Kolb blathered.
"Wingnuts, be they from the left or right, can't abide being disagreed with. They particularly hate stingiing dissent. "

...and Kolb then proves he's a wingnut by showing his ire at the icky awful dissenters who mock him in the comments. So he slanders them.

Can you say "projection"?