Take a good look at this photo. This is what happens in wars that we win effectively and we move through like champions. This is what happens when we ignore tree-huggers that run around claiming to love and support the troops while simultaneously waiting for them to be defeated.
Democratic Presidential candidate, Barack Obama took potshots at the military this week. Read the whole story at Sweetness & Light. Obama said recently:
“We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians”
What an asinine thing to say! He’s right, we do have to get the job done. We could have gotten the job done a lot sooner had it not been for the stupid liberals (not to mention Ron Paul supporters trolling the internet) who have done everything imaginable to make excuses for terrorists and lay the blame of all of it on the USA.
Obama does not realize apparently that concern for civlilians in a time of war is “red-flag number one”when identifying language of people who are trying to protect our enemies. We had killed and/or captured hundreds of thousands of insurgents and members of Al-Queda. We have captued the 9/11 Mastermind and while most us were grateful to the military for it, liberals in Congress cared more about his rights to read the Koran and whether or not he was being water-boarded. We killed Zarqawi and we have rounded up much of Al-Queda’s top guys.
Democrats and supporters of Ron Paul say that this war miraculously gave birth to terrorists. I say that it got the roaches out of their cracks and gave us the opportunity to drop bombs on them.
But thanks to Democrats, the MSM, and blowhards like Ron Paul, the roaches have been able to run back to their cracks and plan for more attacks as is evident of the large bombings in Iraq last weekend.
We could have cleaned up Iraq AND Afghanistan in a week if we fought this war like our brave men fought WW2 as illustrated in the picture above. Civilians would have died, and so would have members of our troops.
But because we are unable to fight it the way we once did, more troops and civilians have died slowly over time than would have if we would have handled this the right way from day one.
If it continues this way, we will lose. Harry Reid can be confident in his position because individuals like himself are making sure of it. Ron Paul and his supporters and making sure of it, and with Rove leaving, something tells me Bush will be making sure of it. Just today, General Patraeus — in response to the Al-Queda suspected bombings over the weekend — is already advocating troop cuts.
2008 is right around the corner folks. We need a real wartime leader who isn’t going to cave-into caterwauling.
All of our lives are at risk here. If the way we fight this war does not change, then I will have absolutely no choice but to fully support Giuliani. At least he will get us past this by fighting this war without much regard for civilian casualty or Democratic whining for Constitutional Rights of terrorists.
While Ron Paul supporters and liberals run around crying about their precious civil rights and bash the Patriot Act, I can somehow in my mind wish that their hysteria would materialize with a few choice amendments to the Bill. The sad fact is folks; these people are just as dangerous to us as Al Queda is. By supporting Ron Paul and using their freedoms to bash our President and troops in wartime, it means they have the rights to go on with their blather because of the ways we once fought wars decades ago. But unfortunately, they are simultaneously making sure that those same freedoms will eventually crumble for all of us.
Is Al-Queda or our other enemies giving much regard for casualties of civilians? Do they care about treating their enemies with regard to constitutional rights?
We can thank one group ultimately for the death of civilians and troops in Iraq, the Democrats and anti-war crazies! They have allowed Al Queda to fight us harder and have blatantly stopped our troops and country from properly defending us.
steveflesher
Philip
Mel Maguire
Mark Ciavola
Comments
Hey, just discovered your blog by accident, and, wow, I’ve been reading for an hour now. Thanks. As a gay Republican m’self, (though liberal, sorry) it’s refreshing to read the thoughts and analysis of a gay men who aren’t afraid to stand up for themselves or their country. I’m especially glad to read your bloggings about Ron Paul. I know a lot of Ron Paul supporters, and your site provides some valid criticism I may be able to use. I live in Sedona, Arizona, where conspiracy theories ARE the mainstream — heck, we’ve got people here who believe aliens live under the red rocks and that a giant but invisible mother ship hovers above the city. Anyway, good to see there are other gay men out there who aren’t supporting the Taliban.
Welcome Mike,
Well, if you’re a liberal we can do something about that
.
Most of your comment seems to agree with me thought so I’m curious as to what your “liberal” over.
Stick around and let us get to know you.
Thanks for the comment.
Steve
Your last paragraph says it all, Steve. You’ve touched on the points that might just start hitting home.
BTW: I’ve refined my ‘screed’. Interested?
Of course I’m always interested.
Steve!
Once again, you’ve outdone yourself! This was perfect, and I’ve been screaming this since the beginning of the war!
And to Mike in Sedona, if you see my barn mate, Stephanie, will you tell her to get her ass back to Texas? My horses miss her (and so do I)! Please do stick around!
OK, Steve. I’ll take a breath and……
Needless to say, I regard highly those of you who have taken initiatives to establish blogs and have articulated your views so well that they have garnered responses not only from those of us with appreciated points of view, but those of opposing trends as well.
Currently I hold no special brief at all on the topic of Islamo-anarchism, other than being freedom loving and some prior engagement. But, from a pedestrian level, I question whether or not those of us who are concerned are being drawn into arguments of vacuum. Many of us accept that we are at war. Too many others could care less. Too many others affecting GQ airs of pseudo-sophistication are waiting for a coupon to fix it. So, rather that run a full ‘screed’, I am putting out not arguments against liberals, but more approaches. They don’t argue anyway. They spout mantras and propagandize. But what can we learn if we don’t listen to another’s point of view, if only to evaluate it against our own {no matter how poorly developed or vacant… {Oops: so much for my diplomacy}? What can they learn if they don’t … (they won’t)? So, what do we do, leave them to struggle on their own and convince themselves that Darwin was in fact a prophet and their survival takes more than wishcraft?
But I should remember – In attacking an incumbent you don’t win over the opposition’s former supporters by assaulting them for how they voted in the past. Inviting them into your position is worth a try. So consider the following more a tactical note than a…..manifesto against liberals….maybe a bridge or pontoon they might use to visit from across their own ideological wall.
The quote from USMALE, which I love, “only in the Western world can a gay man live a free life as himself. Hence, the health and strength of the West is fundamental to my survival.” is only so clear that I can understand how many gay people miss it. Unfortunately, I see the situation as being a form of selective myopia. Many gays fail to see that, out of the whole gay experience, it’s been the few out of time, not the numbers (the community), that have gained us acceptance (or in cases like Foley, Studds, McGreavey, Arafat, Redel, etc.; notoriety). I’ll even gainsay the popular view and say that acceptance begins in the familial, or parochial, before it becomes provincial, national or global. We didn’t achieve franchise in the world through an add-water’n-stir concoction, but a tidal wave of alienating interpretations could wipe it out. For consideration, look at the imposing dhimmitude in Europe falling under the leaden clouds of sharia influence
So….before I alienate you….further…
I have focused on the current terrorism not only for what it is, and only seen as interruptions of historical complacency by some, but a means of those who would have a world without forums. It is war – with or without the bumper sticker. And it is immediate. The opposition isn’t waiting for it to be tabled for a time for dialogue with sociologists. It is being waged in places as remote as distant villages, fields and deserts, and governing councils in Foreignistan, Alliestan and as local as Dearborn, Edina and Columbus, Brooklyn, Oakland , Roxbury..and next door to me on Saint Botolph Street, Boston. This, of course, raises the question of whether we can raise the war on two fronts; the political (US vs. external) and the criminal US, state or city vs. (enterprises that erode domestic security such as illegal immigration, drug and other contraband violations). The legal community will scream like Hell if we take more than one bite of the apple. But, let’s remind ourselves. It’s our apple. We can have it whatever number of ways we want. And the laws of the land can change, and, in the past they have been.
As long as I’ve touched upon our legal system, let’s remember it is among our greatest strengths as it is always being tested. And here I draw from a judo sensei giving instructions, “Determine your opponent’s strength and us it against him”. CAIR has learned that lesson well. (In England where litigation requires a financial surety posting, a $audi prince can be handy.)
Now, you’re probably thinking (and, I too wonder), “This cat’s going paranoid.”
How we approach this might be in the form of how Tom Sawyer got the fence white-washed. Was it subversion, disinformation, neighborhood enhancement or inviting friends to share in the endeavor so they could all (together) go on to other ventures? Hopefully, expressions can be developed that won’t lead to “Well, the ‘Christians did this’, ‘The Church did that’, ‘The Jews did…’ and so on. The response of course is ‘Yes”, But civilization didn’t pedal backward to correct itself. It reformed. Negative arguments stem from the stale of spirit in the first place.
On the other hand there is the risk of coming tangent to the droning mantra of liberal ghoul politics and getting lost in discourse with them. They’re only snipers, move on. They love to activate the immediate horror of present blood-shed (be it either their “Misery Index” or my term, “ghoul politics”), rather than look at how step-by-step and side slipping they brought it on. (They might read Bruce Bawer.) To take their theme of the ‘Sixties’, the idea of “marching to a different drummer” was an inspiration to many, but it hasn’t changed a beat since. Darwin’s evolution would have made a NASCAR rating by comparison. What discourages me lately is the evidence that this current progeny of the Sixties folk are more smug and self satisfied with themselves and there seems to be no challenge mounted. When did the schools start the passivity drugs, anyway? (Even the “Baltimore Catechism” was edited every so many years.) Here and now is the crisis, and I don’t see it being adjourned to discuss at length after Friday Prayers at the ‘Mayberry Mosque’.
So….before I alienate you….even further…
Since September 11th, 2001, there has sprouted an abundance of closet cavaliers and would-be snake-eaters who, only 12 years earlier, were yelling, ‘Kill a Commie for Christ’. We need more than jingoism. People need to realize that we have a real enemy; predatory, hateful and bloodthirsty. They won’t hoot and shoot until that fact – war – is clearly in their mind’s eyes. It’s just possible that epiphany will lead them into thinking and voting toward a victorious solution. Defense against this enemy is not satisfactory. Defeat of this enemy without conditions is essential.
There are some very well worked out resources. (An irony I encountered was taking a deeper look at Robert Spencer. Faulted by my rather inflated arrogance (having served on a few terrorism panels in over twenty years via Association of Former Intelligence Officers), I just filed him in a memory recess. However, through his blog are further avenues to chase solutions and read incites of those with different dispositions.
And with all above written, I openly caution be discerning. One thing I learned over my past is that even among the extremes, the bitter and the sweet can be disguised…..no camouflaged. This is a war.
Dave O’Connor
“Shawmut”
How did that “n” get into Shawmut? There goes credibility.
Shawmut,
It’s been an incredible week and I am so sorry it took me this long to respond.
I am so impressed with your ability to articulate all of the below-the-surface issues mentioned.
You really need a blog, Mister!
Ya know, this is a war. It needs to be fought as such. My overall point is that it would have cost us less money and less lives (both troops and civilians) of we were allowed to go in there and fight it like we once were allowed to fight.
But because of these restrictions put on to us; slowly, more folks have died than was nescessary.
It’s the way it is.
Thanks, Steve, I was afraid it was a bit long and drawn.
Clearly, it’s a war. The most difficult task at hand is convincing the rest of this country to face up to that fact.
And, as I’ve stated, defense against this enemy will not be sufficient. They must be defeated.